germany extradition
Which law prevented the extradition of this Nazi war criminal?
<p>I just watched with the greatest anger the following video about an unrepentant Nazi war criminal who has become the subject of considerable Neo Nazi worship. <a href="https://youtu.be/QiblbmpjuW8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">YouTube Link</a></p>

<p>As explained therein, the Germans can not prosecute him, because he can not be convicted twice for the same crime. He was convicted in France in 1949, but could not be extradited. The crime has since come under the <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations" rel="nofollow noreferrer">statute of limitations</a> in French law. The video says extradition was <em>unstatthaft</em>. </p>

<p>I want to know, as precisely as possible, on what law this inability to extradite was based and when the law was in force. I did some googling for „Auslieferung unstatthaft“, but found nothing.</p>

<p>Edit: The answers below explain very well, why he cannot be extradited now (this is my fault because in the comments I tried to argue there should be a provision for those cases) but I have not yet understood why he wasn’t extradited in 1949 („Auslieferung unstatthaft“).</p>

<hr>

<p>[TLDR/tangent: the argument I am trying to make in the comments, but which doesn’t change the facts here is that non-extradition in 1949 creates the prerequisite for the french verdict to expire. Current law then uses the French verdict as an (understandable) reason for not extraditing, but overlooks the fact that the verdict was rendered moot by non-extradition. This strikes me as a completely predictable loop hole, easy to close by something like this: extradition can not be denied based upon a verdict that was rendered moot by non-extradition...]</p>

<p>The most important rule for an extradition from Germany is this: If the role of the countries were reversed, would the person be convicted in Germany according to German law? You say the link claims that he couldn't be convicted now, because he would have been convicted twice for the same crime. So he wouldn't be convicted in Germany if the roles of the countries were reversed, therefore no extradition. </p>

<p>(The next important rule is this: There must be enough evidence that the person would be prosecuted in Germany, not necessarily convicted. You also need to convince the court that the accused will get a fair trial when extradited, that there will be no cruel or unusual punishment, including death sentence, and lastly there is no extradition for small crimes when the extradition plus having to appear in a foreign court can be considered worse punishment than the actual punishment for the crime. All these irrelevant in this case, I think).</p>

<p>"Auslieferung unstatthaft" just means "extradition inadmissible" or "extradition illegal". </p>

<p>PS. Ludl asked "shouldn't there be some law that if someone cannot be extradited from Germany because of extradition law, they can still be prosecuted in Germany". That would be completely unnecessary. Let's say one US citizen murders another one in Germany, the USA asks for extradition (they wouldn't, because it is a German matter, but they could ask of course), and Germany rightfully refuses. Then since it is a murder on German ground, it will be prosecuted in Germany. It would be absurd to think that a failed extradition request could protect a murderer. </p>

<p><strong>Extradition</strong></p>

<p>Most European continental countries do not permit their citizens to be extradited, based mostly on Roman law. </p>

<p>In Germany this provision was introduced into the constitution in 1919 §12(3) and later defined in 1949 §16(2) Grundgesetz.</p>

<p>Before that it was defined in the §9 Strafgesetzbuch 1872 (penal code). §4(3) regulated how a German can be charged for crimes committed outside the country.</p>

<p>The 1794 and 1851 Prussian code laws contained similar provisions. </p>

<p>Most extradition treaties are written so that extradition can be denied if crime is not compatible with the requested countries laws.  For example, the U.S. and Canada have similar laws and legal systems that a person who is charged with Murder by the U.S. should be quick for Canada to Extradite... However, the U.S. still has the Death Penalty in many states and in the Federal Courts.  If the accused is being extradicted for a crime that could be a Death Penalty offense, they can refuse because the punishment is greater in the U.S. than in Canada (This solution is that the the U.S. Prosecutor promises not to seek the Death Penalty... most states require the Prosecutor to make the fact that they want the Death Penalty known formally and well before the trial there are certain circumstances the trial needs to put in place...).</p>

<p>In the case you have, because the Statute of Limitations for the crime has expired, France would not consider the figure as elligible to stand trial for a similar crime in Germany and since they would not arrest him, they cannot arrest him for Germany.</p>
