Extradition of offenders is a formal process by which a person is surrendered by one State to another State. The requirements of positive substantive for extradition are: dual criminality, extraditable offenses and specialty. According to specialty, a person extradited under a treaty shall not be proceeded against, sentenced, detained or subjected to any other restriction of personal liberty in the territory of the requesting State for any offence committed before surrender other than an offence for which extradition was granted or any other offence in respect of which the requested State consents. The philosophy of the existence of the specialty is the protection of the rights of the accused, as well as the providing confidence to the requested State so as to ensure that the requesting State does not abuse its authority. This principle was included in sources of extradition in Legal systems of IRAN, the USA and the United Nations (UN) Model Treaty. Given the philosophy of the existence of this principle in the simultaneous protection of the rights of the accused person and the State, one of the problems with the implementation of the principle is the possibility of abandoning this principle by the state and or the accused; this leads to a question in determining the beneficiaries of this principle. The question is whether the accused person can cite principle despite the withdrawal of the State from it? This paper, by examining documents and case law, concludes that by creating a hierarchy between the interests of the requested State and the accused and prioritizing the interests of the requested State can resolve the conflict between the interests of them, provided that the withdrawal of the requested State does not violate other rights of the accused person.
Ahmadinejad, M. (2012), “Prohibition of the Extradition and Deportation Offenders at the Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights with Considering the European Convention of Human Rights”, Journal of Criminal Law Research, Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn, pp 1-32. (In Persian)
Ardebili, M. A. (2003), Matual Assistance in Criminal Matters and Extradition with Emphasis on Drug -Related Offences, First Edition, Tehran: Mizan publication. (In Persian)
Pour Zulfiqar, S. Kalantari, K. (2015), Prohibition of the Extradition in Iranian Law and International Law, International conference on research approaches in humanities and management.
Khaleghi, A. (2005), “European Arrest Warrant and its Impact on Extradition Law in the European Union”, Journal of Legal Research, Volume 4, Issue 7, pp 13-28. (In Persian)
Shariat Bagheri, M. J. (2014), “Ratification of International Judicial Agreement in Iran; Problems and Solutions”, Judicial Law Views Quarterly, Volume 19, No. 66, pp 39-74. (In Persian)
Ali Abadi, A. (1973), Criminal law, Volume III, Tehran: Publications of Bank Melli Iran. (In Persian)
Abbasi, M. (1993), Extradition of Offenders, Tehran: Ganj Danesh publication. (In Persian)
Fatemi Shariat Panahi, S. K. (1971), Extradition of Offenders, Second Edition, Qom: Publications of University of judicial sciences and administrative services. .(In Persian)
Mohseni, M. (2003), General Criminal Law, Volume I, Tehran: Ganj Danesh publication. (In Persian)
Agreement on extradition of offenders between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Republic of Uzbekistan, 18 January, 2003. http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/93879>.2/25/2018. (In Persian)
Agreement on Legal Assistance in Civil and Criminal Matters between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Bosnia and Herzegovina, 9 May 2012. http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/828419>.2/25/2018. (In Persian)
The extradition treaty between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the People's Republic of China, 20 September, 2014. http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/952080> .2/25/2015. (In Persian)
The Bill on International Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters in Iranian Parliament (Not Final Approval) (In Persian)
Agrawala, S. K. (1965) International law: Indian courts and legislature, New York: Oceana Publications.
Bassiouni, M. C. (2014) International extradition: United States law and practice, Sixth Edition, New York: Oxford University Press.
Garcia, M. J., Doyle, Charles (2010) “Extradition to and from the United States: Overview of the law and Recent Treaties”, Congressional Research Service DIANE Publishing.
Iraola, R. (2008) “The Doctrine of Specialty and Federal Criminal Prosecutions”, Valparaiso University Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 1, 89-112.
Germany International Extradition Treaty with the United States, August 29, (1980)
Model Treaty on Extradition, 14 December (1990)
The European Union convention on simplified extradition procedure, 10 March 1995
Revised Manuals on the Model Treaty on Extradition and on the Model Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, 8 December (2002)
Qaitooli, A., Janipour, M., & Sobhani, M. (2018). A Comparative Study on Specialty Rule in Legal Systems of IRAN and the USA. Comparative Law Review, 9(1), 331-350. doi: 10.22059/jcl.2018.249117.633605
MLA
Azad Qaitooli; Mojtaba Janipour; Mahin Sobhani. "A Comparative Study on Specialty Rule in Legal Systems of IRAN and the USA". Comparative Law Review, 9, 1, 2018, 331-350. doi: 10.22059/jcl.2018.249117.633605
HARVARD
Qaitooli, A., Janipour, M., Sobhani, M. (2018). 'A Comparative Study on Specialty Rule in Legal Systems of IRAN and the USA', Comparative Law Review, 9(1), pp. 331-350. doi: 10.22059/jcl.2018.249117.633605
VANCOUVER
Qaitooli, A., Janipour, M., Sobhani, M. A Comparative Study on Specialty Rule in Legal Systems of IRAN and the USA. Comparative Law Review, 2018; 9(1): 331-350. doi: 10.22059/jcl.2018.249117.633605
)
