Letter: Pinochet ruling
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.In yesterday's ruling quashing the request for the extradition of Agusto Pinochet, Lord Chief Justice Bingham upheld the principle "that one sovereign state will not impugn another in relation to its sovereign acts".
Are we to take it that the violent overthrow of the democratically elected Chilean government in 1973 was a sovereign act? The torture and murder of Michael Woodward, a British priest, and the torture of Sheila Cassidy, a British doctor, must also have been sovereign acts. The 94 people, including the Swiss student Alexei Jaccard, cited in Judge Baltasar Garzon's extradition request were presumably all victims of sovereign acts.
Never mind that the Criminal Justice Act of 1988, which incorporates the 1984 Convention Against Torture, makes torture a crime wherever it is committed and whatever the nationalities involved.
The European Convention on Terrorism requires Britain to extradite Pinochet.
PAULO FRANK
Annemasse, France
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments