Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-ksm4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T05:05:30.434Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In RE Kam-Shu. 477 F.2d 333

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judical Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 68 , Issue 1 , January 1974 , pp. 125 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The court said: “The opinion stated that the negotiators of the treaty did not intend to preclude extradition for murder at sea by not including it in the paragraph enumerating extraditable crimes committed at sea [Art. 11(8)], rather they formulated that paragraph for the purpose of adding specific crimes which by their terms are capable of commission only at sea. The District Court accepted that interpretation of the treaty, and we also find that interpretation persuasive.” 477 F.2d 333, 336, n. 2 (other footnotes by court omitted).

2 54 Stat. 1733.

3 477 F.2d 333, 339.