Extradition from Lebanon to the United States—Mohammed Ali Hamadi

The big story today is the release of convicted terrorist Mohammed Ali Hamadi from a German prison and his subsequent “escape” to Lebanon.^[1] Mohammed Ali Hamadi was released from a German prison after serving 19 years of a life sentence for the 1985 hijacking of a TWA jetliner, which resulted in the death of US Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem.^[2] Mr. Hamadi’s case came up on a court-mandated review, and, after an expert assessment which determined that “[e]verything was O.K. with him, the prison evaluation, the psychologist’s and the prosecutor’s,” was released.^[3] It was widely understood that the United States wanted Mr. Hamadi to be extradited to the United States from Germany, but German Justice Ministry spokeswoman Eva Schmierer said that Germany had not received a request from the US for his extradition.^[4] The assertion was echoed by a spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry, who said, “[i]f there had been such a request we would have been informed.”^[5]

According to State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, the US has sought jurisdiction over Hamadi after his 1987 arrest, and has repeatedly sought to have him tried in the US.^[6] However, because the Germans oppose the death penalty, and do not extraditie individuals who may face the death penalty, they insisted on prosecuting Mr. Hamadi themselves.^[7] Under the terms of the extradition treaty between the United States and Germany, such a refusal is allowed, unless the requesting state provides sufficient assurances that the death penalty will not be sought, or, if it is sought, will not be executed.^[8]

However, now that Mr. Hamadi has made his way to Lebanon, the United States is “disappointed by the fact that he was released before the end of his sentence.”^[9] Nonetheless, the US “will make every effort to see that this individual faces justice in the US,”^[10] which could be a problem considering that the US and Lebanon do not have an extradition treaty, and relations between the countries are often strained.

There does exist, however, the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft. This Convention places a duty on the country in which the alleged offender is found to either extradite the individual or prosecute him.^[11] If there were an extradition treaty between Lebanon and the US, hijacking an aircraft would constitute an extraditable offense, and any future extradition treaty between the two nations are required to “undertake to include the offence as an extraditable offence in every extradition treaty to be concluded between them.”^[12] If Lebanon makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty, it “may at its option consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition in respect of the offence.”^[13] If Lebanon does not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty, then it “shall recognize the offence as an extraditable offence.”^[14]

While most extradition treaties contain provisions for addressing convictions of the individual for the acts alleged, the Convention does not do so. However, it makes it clear that in considering whether to extradite or prosecute the individual, the decision will be made “in the same manner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State.”^[15]

---

[1] See, e.g., TWA Hijacker Released from German Prison, Wash. Post, Dec. 20, 2005 [hereinafter WP]; Lebanese Hijacker Freed After 19 Years of Life Sentence, Agence France-Presse, Dec. 20, 2005 [hereinafter AFP]; Richard Bernstein, Germany Frees Hijacker Who Killed U.S. Sailor, NY Times, Dec. 20, 2005; US Disappointed by Release of TWA Hijacker, Agence France-Presse, Dec. 20, 2005 [hereinafter AFP2]; US Wants to try Lebanese Hijacker, Irish Examiner, Dec. 20, 2005 [hereinafter IE]; Justiz lässt Hisbollah-Mitglied Hammadi frei, Der Spiegel, Dec. 20, 2005; Berlin a libéré un membre du Hezbollah condamné à la perpétuité en Allemagne, Le Monde, Dec. 20, 2005.
[2] WP, supra.
[3] Bernstein, supra note 1.
[4] WP, supra note 1.
[5] AFP, supra note 1.
[6] IT, supra note 1.
[7] WP, supra note 1.
[8] Extradition Treaty, Jun. 20, 1978, U.S.-F.R.G., art. 12, 32 U.S.T. 1485.
[9] AFP2, supra note 1.
[10] Id.
[11] Convention For the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, Dec. 16, 1970, art. 7, 22 U.S.T. 1641.
[12] Id. art. 8, para. 1.
[13] Id. art. 8, para. 2.
[14] Id. art. 8, para. 3.
[15] Id. art. 7; see also art. 8, para. 2 (“[e]xtradition shall be subject to the other conditions provided by the law of the requested State.”); art. 8, para. 3 (the recognition of the offense as extraditable is “subject to the conditions provided by the law of the requested State.”).