Anne Sacoolas extradition refusal 'final', say US authorities.
The basis is the legally flawed suggestion that extraditing someone who had diplomatic immunity at the time of an alleged crime, but no longer has it, would be an abuse of diplomatic law /1 bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan…
The basis is the legally flawed suggestion that extraditing someone who had diplomatic immunity at the time of an alleged crime, but no longer has it, would be an abuse of diplomatic law /1 bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan…
The obvious reason why the United States approach is flawed is that diplomatic law expressly anticipates that certain immunities are time limited, ie they expire once a person leaves the host state - see article 39(2) of the Vienna Convention /2 
If it had been the intention of states, including the USA, who signed up to the Vienna Convention to prevent extradition in cases where someone had already left the host nation they would have made all immunities permanent rather than some transitory/3
However, reality is facts on the ground mean once a person has left, it is infinitely harder to get them back to account for their crimes. Which makes this case all the more problematic, as the FCO knew immunity position was unclear and still allowed Sacoolas + family to leave /4
... and did so without consultation with the police or CPS, who were not told (1) the legal position was unclear, (2) the FCO were in effect authorising their departure, (3) the immunity waiver request has been rejected so the family were likely to leave imminently /5
For me, and the facts are still emerging, the Harry Dunn case shows there is a real risk in cases involving diplomats of a conflict between law-enforcement and the foreign office, where the police are focussed on justice and the FCO on not causing a diplomatic ‘incident’ /6
In this case, it is clear to me at least that the FCO wanted to be the primary decision maker and so kept the police out of the loop. At the very least, this case should lead to a clear, published written protocol between state agencies /7
But also a full reckoning through courts or a public inquiry of how institutional and individual decision-making resulted in this mess occurring. Still significant questions to be answered eg what pressure was applied by the US and was not keeping police in loop deliberate /8
