Re Santis Atencia
| Jurisdicción | Venezuela |
| Fecha | 13 Marzo 1956 |
| Emisor | Corte Federal (Venezuela) |
Extradition — Conditions of — Preliminary Examination of Evidence Submitted in Request for Extradition — Extraditable Offences — Principle of Double Criminality — Identity of Accused — The Law of Venezuela.
The Facts.—Colombia requested the extradition of Manuel Santis Atencia, a Colombian national, on charges of embezzlement and misrepresentation. Santis Atencia, seeking his release from detention, argued that the extradition request did not conform to (1) the requirements of the Bolivarian Treaty on Extradition of 1911,2 regarding indentification of the fugitive and his complicity in the offences charged, or (2) the requirement of Article 354 of the Bustamante Code (or Code of Private International Law of 1928)3
which provides that where the penalty for the offence is less than one year's imprisonment, extradition may not be requested, and that the Bolivarian Treaty does not make any reference to the offence of embezzlementHeld: that the request for extradition must be granted.
The Court, after reviewing the facts, said: “The extradition request is supported by the following documents: (a) an authenticated copy of the pertinent provisions of the Colombian Penal Code and Code of Penal Procedure concerning the offences of embezzlement and misrepresentation with which Manuel Santis Atencia is charged; and (b) the warrant for the arrest of the accused, which has apparently been issued by the appropriate authorities acting in accordance with the laws of the requesting State. The Colombian request is based upon Article 1 of the Bolivarian Treaty on Extradition which provides:
‘Extradition will only be granted upon the submission of evidence showing that the offence is one for which the fugitive could be detained or brought to trial in the asylum State had the alleged offence been committed therein.’
“Given the specific provision of Article 1, it follows that we must examine the evidence submitted by the requesting State with a view to determining whether it would afford sufficient grounds for the arrest of Santis Atencia under Venezuelan law or, in other words, whether the grounds upon which the warrant for arrest was issued conform to the requirements of Article 182 of our Code of Criminal Procedure. This Article provides that a warrant for arrest can issue only where there is proof that the offence charged carries a penalty of corporal punishment and where there is prima facie evidence of complicity of the...
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba