Chile

The case concerned a Chilean extradition request from Argentina for prosecution in relation to arson in an inhabited place and unlawful possession of a handmade firearm. The Supreme Court of Argentina upheld the extradition order. It rejected the defence argument that the previous annulment and closure of an earlier extradition proceeding amounted to a prior refusal capable of triggering the non bis in idem bar under the Montevideo Extradition Convention. It also held that double criminality was satisfied: the alleged arson corresponded to the Argentine offence of causing fire with common danger, while the handmade firearm could be treated as a firearm under Argentine law. The Court further rejected the political offence objection. Although the alleged facts were said to arise in the context of indigenous land claims and social conflict, the Court held that the alleged arson of an inhabited property, committed at night and endangering occupants including minors, lacked the necessary direct and proportionate link with a political offence or objective. The Court also dismissed objections based on persecution, nationality, race and cruel or inhuman punishment, while requiring Chile to credit the time already spent in detention during the previous extradition proceedings. Extradition was therefore confirmed for the arson and firearm-possession charges.