Russia Extradition Law โ Case Law, Legal Framework and Procedure
Extradition cases involving Russia โ Requested and Requesting State
Connected jurisdictions
Key Resources
Latest News
Amnesty: misuse of Interpol red notices to target dissidents a grave institutional failure
Read โAmnesty International ยท 26 Jan 2026
Russia withdraws from the Council of Europeโs Anti-Torture Convention
Read โ Council of Europe anti-torture Committee (CPT) ยท 03 Nov 2025
Case Law
Procedural Safeguards and Sufficiency of Extradition Documents in Extradition Proceedings under Turkish Law
โ
Summary
The case concerned an extradition request submitted by the Russian Federation against a person sought for the offence of establishing a criminal organization.The Ankara 33rd Heavy Penal Court found the extradition request admissible under Law No. 6706 and the bilateral treaty between Tรผrkiye and the Russian Federation.The defence appealed, arguing inter alia that:- the extradition request contained contradictory and incomplete information;- the alleged conduct, place of commission, and applicable legal provisions were insufficiently specified;- the requested person risked politically motivated prosecution;- extradition could expose the requested person to torture, ill-treatment, or disproportionate punishment;- defence rights had been violated;- and proportionality and family circumstances had not been properly considered.The Turkish Court of Cassation held that:additional information and supporting evidence should have been requested from the Russian Federation;the alleged acts should have been concretely specified regarding place, time, and manner of commission;translated and certified evidentiary materials linking the requested person to the alleged offence should have been obtained;double criminality and limitation-period assessments required further clarification.The Court further found that:- the requested person had not properly been informed about consent-based extradition procedures;- defence rights had been restricted because extradition materials had not been properly disclosed;- specialty-principle guarantees had not been reflected in the judgment;- and the lower court failed to assess family integration, long-term residence, health conditions, and proportionality under Article 11(4) of Law No. 6706.The extradition admissibility judgment was therefore quashed.
16/09/2025 ยท Turkish Court of Cassation (Yargฤฑtay), 4th Criminal Chamber ยท E. 2025/5784, K. 2025/13611
๐น๐ทTurkey โ ๐ท๐บRussia
Rejected (procedural grounds)ExtraditionCountry Contributor
Anton Pulyaev
Advolaw
Anton Pulyaev is a Russian criminal defence lawyer and Managing Partner of ADVOLAW.
He has been in legal practice since 2006.
His practice focuses on white-collar crime, international criminal matters, economic offences, and business risk protection.
He advises and represents individuals and companies in complex criminal, regulatory, and cross-border cases.
He has been in legal practice since 2006.
His practice focuses on white-collar crime, international criminal matters, economic offences, and business risk protection.
He advises and represents individuals and companies in complex criminal, regulatory, and cross-border cases.
Need legal assistance?
Extradition proceedings involving Russia
Contact a specialist lawyer with proven experience in extradition cases.
