Posted: September 9th, 2022

International criminal law

International criminal law

Adolf Eichmann was abducted from Argentina in 1960 by the Israel government. Eichmann was living in Argentina under an assumed name, and the circumstance of his “transportation” was unknown by the Argentina government. Research shows that Eichmann was locked in a private house fr nine days before being transported to Israel. Eichmann was charged with crimes against humanity and Jewish people. The District Court of Jerusalem tried him. In 1961, Eichmann was found guilty, and he was executed by hanging.
How Eichmann was brought to justice raises controversy. The puzzle centers around the claim that Eichmann was illegally abducted from Argentina. International law states that a state is not allowed to perform acts of sovereignty in a foreign territory. Many states consider the fundamental human liberty that protects individuals from arbitrary or abduction arrest. Also, these laws protect individuals from violence and forceful removal from their legal territory. Therefore, Eichmann’s arrest breached international law (Liskofsky,2011). A state cannot send agents to another territory to arrest suspects; however, it’s permissible to ask the accused to return to its original territory. If the accused person refuses, the state does not have a right to pressure the individual. Therefore, the state had no right to abduct Eichmann without Argentina’s consent. Eichmann was forcibly abducted and locked up before being transported to Israel. Israel breached the general international law. Research shows that if Eichmann had been abducted by private volunteers acting without the Israel government’s knowledge, then the breach would not occur Israel. However, the abductors were acting on behalf of Israel’s government (Shapira, 2014).
Kidnapping and abduction is not the most legit way to convict a criminal. Other conventional ways, such as extradition treaties, can get applied. However, such methods have proved ineffective when fighting acts of terrorism. Eichmann had committed massive crimes against Jews in the Holocaust. Thus, Israel had a moral right to abduct him and bring him to trial because it was a limited case. Research shows that the court undermines the jurisdiction over a suspect seized against the state laws and wishes. Such action can limit a government form dealing with serious crimes that may remain notorious and impervious to law enforcement. Irregular means of attaining a suspect’s custody can be justified in extraordinary cases such as terrorism and other acts against humanity (Shapira,2014). Diplomatic and limited repercussions limit acts of abduction. For instance, in this scenario, Israel has to hand over Eichmann back to Argentina. Also, the offending state is expected to pay reparations for the committed offense. In this case, Israel is expected to pay reparations to Argentina. Therefore, irregular means of accessing fugitives, such as kidnapping, are only limited to extraordinary cases. When the objectives outweigh the disadvantages, the government can conduct irregular means to gain custody. Also, in an extraordinary case, the courts will have to intervene to attain justice.

References
Liskofsky, S. (2011). The Eichmann Case. The American Jewish Year Book, 199-208.
Shapira, A. (2014). The Eichmann Trial: Changing Perspectives. Journal of Israeli History, 23(1), 18-39.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: International criminal law