Talk:UK–US extradition treaty of 2003

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Importance[edit]

On the basis of the amount of attention this controversial act has been receiving in the UK press would not a higher level of importance be appropriate for this article than 'low'? (looking at the importance assessment criteria that would appear to be the case). I would have thought 'mid' would be appropriate for both law and UK politics.1812ahill (talk) 13:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, made both mid. Aarghdvaark (talk) 14:09, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One-sided?[edit]

This article presents a very limited and one-sided view of the Extradition Act: it discusses it almost entirely in the context of British people being extradited to the United States. Of course, it's actually a bilateral arrangement, and in fact the other day I read that more Americans have been extradited to the UK under the Act than Britons have been extradited to the US. But there aren't any of those listed in the examples section - surely they should be added.

(And that's not to mention the fact that the Act covers more than two countries: amongst other things, it includes the European Arrest Warrant system, so this article should really discuss extraditions to and from other EU countries to give a more balanced picture of the Act.) Robofish (talk) 14:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly agree. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 13:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The act causes controversy in the UK because of the extradition of people to the US for things they have done in the UK, sometimes things which are not a crime in the UK and sometimes things which although criminal were committed here in the UK, i.e. US jurisdiction is being extended over the UK. Naturally this transference of sovereignty causes deep seated feelings of unease. I am not aware of anyone being extradited for trial to any other country for something they did in the UK. I am also unaware of anyone being extradited from the US to the UK for something they did in the US? Generally extradition is uncontroversial and would merit little attention apart from extradition lawyers, but this extradition act has generated a huge amount of controversy and really that is what the article seeks to explain. Aarghdvaark (talk) 03:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've split this article away from the article on the Extradition Act 2003. The treaty and act clearly deserve to have separate articles. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 18:19, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on UK–US extradition treaty of 2003. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:34, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on UK–US extradition treaty of 2003. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:17, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:UK–US_extradition_treaty_of_2003&oldid=1205818149"