{"id":"F1996B01211","name":"Extradition (United Mexican States) Regulations","slug":"extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"36 of 1991","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":29024,"registerId":"commonwealth-F1996B01211-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Extradition (United Mexican States) Regulations","content":"Statutory Rules 1991 No. 361\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\nExtradition (United Mexican States) Regulations\n\nI, THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL of the Commonwealth of Australia, acting with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, hereby make the following Regulations under the Extradition Act 1988.\n\nDated 21 March 1991.\n\nBILL HAYDEN\n\nGovernor-General\n\nBy His Excellency’s Command,\n\nMICHAEL DUFFY\n\nAttorney-General\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\nCitation\n\n1. These Regulations may be cited as the Extradition (United Mexican States) Regulations.\n\nCommencement\n\n2. These Regulations commence on 27 March 1991.\n\n  \n\nInterpretation\n\n3. In these Regulations unless the contrary intention appears:\n\n“Mexico” means the United Mexican States;\n\n“the Act” means the Extradition Act 1988.\n\nDeclaration of Mexico as extradition country\n\n4. Mexico is declared to be an extradition country.\n\nApplication of Act\n\n5. The Act applies in relation to Mexico subject to the Treaty on Extradition between Australia and Mexico done at Canberra on 22 June 1990 (being the treaty a copy of the English text of which is set out in the Schedule).\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\nSCHEDULE Regulation 5\n\nTREATY ON EXTRADITION BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND\n\nTHE UNITED MEXICAN STATES\n\nAUSTRALIA AND THE UNITED MEXICAN STATES,\n\nAware of the close ties existing between both peoples and desiring to promote greater co-operation between the two countries in all areas of common interest, including the suppression of crime, by concluding a treaty on extradition,\n\nHAVE AGREED as follows:\n\nObligation to Extradite\n\nARTICLE 1\n\nThe Parties agree to extradite to each other, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, persons against whom criminal proceedings have been initiated or who are wanted for the imposition or enforcement of a judicial sentence involving deprivation of liberty for an extraditable offence.\n\nExtraditable Offences\n\nARTICLE 2\n\n1. For the purposes of this Treaty, extraditable offences are those offences, however named, which are punishable under the laws of both Parties by a penalty no less severe than deprivation of liberty for a maximum period of at least one year.\n\n2. When the request for extradition relates to a person convicted of such an offence, who is wanted for the enforcement of a sentence of deprivation of liberty, extradition shall be granted only if a period of at least six months of such penalty remains to be served.\n\n3. For the purposes of this Article, in determining whether conduct is an offence against the laws of both Parties and the constituent elements of the offence differ, the totality of the acts or omissions alleged against the person whose extradition is sought shall be taken into account.\n\n4. When the offence has been committed outside the territory of the Requesting State extradition shall be granted when the law of the Requested Party provides for the punishment of an offence committed outside its territory in similar circumstances. When the law of the Requested Party does not so provide the Requested Party may, in its discretion, grant extradition.\n\n5. Extradition may be granted pursuant to the provisions of this Treaty irrespective of when the offence in relation to which extradition is sought was committed, provided that it was an offence under the laws of both Parties at the time of the acts or omissions constituting the offence and at the time of the making of the request for extradition.\n\nARTICLE 3\n\nOffences which are made extraditable by multilateral conventions to which both States are parties shall also be extraditable offences for the purposes of this Treaty.\n\nARTICLE 4\n\nExtradition shall be granted for offences against laws relating to taxation, customs duties, foreign exchange control or other revenue matters where the acts or omissions constitute an extraditable offence against the laws of both Parties.\n\nExceptions to Extradition\n\nARTICLE 5\n\n1. Extradition shall not be granted for offences regarded as political offences by the Requested Party or connected with offences of that nature. For the purposes of this Treaty the murder or other offence against the life, physical integrity or liberty of a Head of State or of Government, or a member of that person's family, shall not be considered a political offence.\n\n2. Extradition shall also not be granted if the Requested Party has substantial grounds for believing that the request for extradition has been made with the aim of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of that person's race, religion, nationality or political opinions, or that the person's situation may be prejudiced for any of those reasons.\n\nARTICLE 6\n\nExtradition shall not be granted for an offence which is a military offence only and not an offence under the ordinary criminal law of both Parties.\n\nARTICLE 7\n\nExtradition shall not be granted if final judgment has been passed or the person has been pardoned or granted an amnesty in the Requested State or has served the sentence for the acts or omissions constituting the offence for which extradition is requested.\n\nARTICLE 8\n\nExtradition shall not be granted when criminal proceedings can no longer be instituted by reason of lapse of time or any other cause in accordance with the law of either Party.\n\nARTICLE 9\n\nExtradition shall not be granted if the person sought is liable to be tried by an extraordinary or special tribunal in the territory of the Requesting State, nor for the enforcement of a sentence imposed by such a tribunal.\n\nARTICLE 10\n\n1. Both Parties may refuse extradition of their nationals. The nationality of a person shall be determined at the time of decision on the extradition request.\n\n2. If a Party refuses to extradite a national it shall, at the request of the Requesting Party and to the extent permitted by its law, submit the case to the competent authorities in order that proceedings for prosecution may be initiated in accordance with the laws of that Party. In such cases the documents, reports and objects relating to the offence shall be sent free of charge in the manner provided for in Article 16 and the Requesting Party shall be informed of the decision taken.\n\nARTICLE 11\n\nThe Requested Party may refuse extradition when, in accordance with its own laws, its courts are competent to try the offence for which extradition has been requested.\n\nARTICLE 12\n\nIf the person sought has been convicted in that person's absence, extradition shall not be granted unless the Requesting Party gives assurances that the person's defence will be heard and that all rights and opportunities prescribed by its law will be made available to the person.\n\nARTICLE 13\n\nIf, according to the laws of the Requesting Party, the offence for which extradition is requested or any other offence for which the person could be detained or tried in accordance with this Treaty is punishable by death, extradition shall only be granted if the Requesting Party gives such assurances as the Requested Party considers sufficient that the death penalty will not be carried out.\n\nARTICLE 14\n\nExtradition may also be refused:\n\n(a) if the offence for which extradition is sought is an offence which carries a punishment of the kind referred to in Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; or\n\n(b) if, in exceptional cases, the Requested Party, while also taking into account the nature of the offence and the interests of the Requesting Party, deems that, because of the personal circumstances of the person sought, the extradition would be totally incompatible with humanitarian considerations.\n\nAuthentication of Requests\n\nARTICLE 15\n\n1. The request for extradition shall be made in writing through the diplomatic channel.\n\n2. All documents submitted in support of a request for extradition shall be authenticated, in accordance with the following provisions:\n\n(a) in the case of a request made by the United Mexican States, a document is authenticated for the purposes of this Treaty if:\n\n(i) it purports to be signed or certified by a judicial authority of the United Mexican States, and\n\n(ii) it purports to be sealed with an official seal of the United Mexican States.\n\n(b) in the case of a request made by Australia, a document is authenticated for the purposes of this Treaty if:\n\n(i) the document is certified by a competent judicial authority of Australia, and\n\n(ii) the document is legalized by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and by the Mexican diplomatic or consular representative duly accredited to Australia.\n\nDocumentary Requirements\n\nARTICLE 16\n\n1. The following documents, accompanied by a translation into the language of the Requested State, shall be sent with the extradition request:\n\n(a) a statement of the acts or omissions for which the extradition is requested, indicating as precisely as possible the time and place of their commission and their legal description;\n\n(b) the original or authenticated copy of the warrant of arrest, warrant of commitment, conviction or sentence, if imposed, or any other judicial order made under the laws of the Requesting Party which authorizes the arrest of the person and from which the existence of the offence and its commission by the person sought may be reasonably inferred;\n\n(c) a statement of the basis of the laws relating to the offence or offences which are the subject of the request and a statement of the punishment that may be imposed and the provisions relating to the period of limitation or prescription;\n\n(d) the details which enable the identity and nationality of the person sought to be established and, whenever possible, information which may help establish the person's location; and\n\n(e) when a person has been convicted, a statement that it is intended to impose a sentence or, when a sentence has been imposed, the length of that sentence, the fact that it is immediately enforceable and, if applicable, the period remaining to be served.\n\n2. To the extent permitted by the law of the Requested Party, extradition of a person may be granted pursuant to the provisions of this Treaty, notwithstanding that the requirements of this Article have not been complied with, provided that the person sought consents to an order for his extradition being made.\n\nAdditional Information\n\nARTICLE 17\n\nIf the details or documents sent with the request for extradition are insufficient or defective, the Requested Party shall inform the Requesting Party of the omissions or defects which may be corrected, before the request will be submitted to the judicial authority.\n\nRule of Speciality\n\nARTICLE 18\n\nA person extradited under this Treaty shall not be detained, tried or punished in the territory of the Requesting State for an offence other than that for which extradition has been granted nor be extradited by the Requesting Party to a third State, for any offence committed prior to the extradition, unless:\n\n(a) the person has left the territory of the Requesting State after extradition and has voluntarily returned to it;\n\n(b) the person has not left the territory of the Requesting State within 60 days after being free to do so; or\n\n(c) the Requested Party has given its consent to such detention, trial, punishment or to extradition to a third State. The request for the consent of the Requested Party under this Article shall be accompanied by the documents mentioned in Article 16.\n\n2. These provisions shall not apply to offences committed after the extradition.\n\nProvisional Arrest\n\nARTICLE 19\n\n1. In case of urgency, the Requesting Party may apply through the diplomatic channel for the provisional arrest of a person sought. Such an application shall contain a description of the person sought, a statement that extradition is to be requested through the diplomatic channel, a statement of the existence of one of the documents mentioned in paragraph (b) of Article 16 authorising the arrest of the person, a statement of the offence alleged and of the punishment that can be, or has been, imposed for the offence and a summary of the acts or omissions alleged to constitute the offence.\n\n2. An application for provisional arrest may be made by any written means.\n\n3. On receipt of the application referred to in paragraph 1, the Requested Party shall take the necessary steps to secure the arrest of the person sought. The Requesting Party shall be informed of the outcome of its application.\n\n4. The person provisionally arrested may be discharged if on the expiration of 60 days the Requested Party has not received the request for extradition and the documents mentioned in Article 16 or documents requested pursuant to Article 17.\n\n5. The discharge of a person shall not preclude the institution of extradition proceedings if the request and the documents mentioned in Article 16 are subsequently received.\n\nConcurrent Requests\n\nARTICLE 20\n\nIf concurrent requests for extradition are received from one of the Parties and other States, either for the same offence or different offences, the Requested Party shall determine to which of those States extradition shall be granted, having regard to the circumstances, including other treaties under which the Requested Party has obligations, the relative seriousness of the offences, the place of commission of the offences, the dates of the respective requests, the nationality and ordinary place of residence of the person sought and the possibility of later extradition.\n\nSurrender\n\nARTICLE 21\n\n1. The Requested Party shall communicate its decision on the request for extradition to the Requesting Party through the diplomatic channel.\n\n2. If extradition is refused, either totally or partially, reasons shall be given.\n\n3. If extradition is granted, the Parties shall mutually decide on arrangements for the surrender of the person sought. The Requesting Party shall remove the person whose extradition has been granted within 60 days from the date on which that Party receives advice from the Requested Party that the person is available for surrender.\n\n4. If the person sought has not been removed from the Requested State within the period specified, that person shall be released.\n\nPostponement of Surrender\n\nARTICLE 22\n\n1. The Requested Party may, after having made its decision on the request for extradition, postpone the surrender of the person in order to prosecute that person for an offence other than that for which it has granted extradition or, if sentence has already been passed for such an offence, so that the person may serve that sentence in its territory.\n\n2. With the written consent of the person sought, the Requested Party may defer surrender when, for reasons of the health of the person, surrender may endanger that person's life or aggravate his or her condition.\n\nSurrender of Property\n\nARTICLE 23\n\n1. At the request of the Requesting Party, the Requested Party shall secure and deliver, to the extent its laws permit and without prejudice to the rights of third parties, property:\n\n(a) that may serve as evidence; or\n\n(b) which has been obtained as a result of the offence and has been found in the possession of the person sought at the time of that person's arrest, or which has been subsequently found.\n\n2. The property mentioned in paragraph 1 shall, if the Requesting Party so requests, be surrendered even though the extradition cannot be carried out owing to the death, disappearance or escape of the person sought.\n\n3. The Requested Party may temporarily retain any property mentioned in paragraph 1 if it is the subject of, or required for, proceedings in that State, or it may temporarily surrender it on condition that it be returned free of charge.\n\n4. When the Requested Party or third parties have rights over the property surrendered to the Requesting Party in accordance with the provisions of this Article, such property shall be returned to the Requested Party as soon as possible and free of charge.\n\nTransit\n\nARTICLE 24\n\n1. When a person is to be extradited to a Party from a third State through the territory of the other Party, the Party to which the person is to be extradited shall request the other Party to permit the transit of that person through its territory.\n\n2. A request for permission to transit shall be made through the diplomatic channel and shall be accompanied by a copy of the resolution granting the extradition.\n\n3. Upon receipt of such a request the Requested Party shall grant the request unless there are reasons of public policy for opposing the request. The Requested Party may also refuse permission to transit if the person is a national of that State.\n\n4. The authorities of the transit State shall be responsible for the custody of the prisoner while that person remains in its territory.\n\n5. The Requesting Party shall re-imburse the transit State for any expenses it incurs in connection with the transit.\n\nMultilateral Obligations\n\nARTICLE 25\n\nNothing in this Treaty shall affect any obligations which have been or shall in the future be assumed by both Parties under any multilateral convention.\n\nApplicable Laws\n\nARTICLE 26\n\nThe laws of the respective Parties shall be applied to the extent that the provisions of this Treaty do not govern the extradition proceedings.\n\nExpenses\n\nARTICLE 27\n\nThe expenses incurred in relation to an extradition in the territory of the Requested Party shall be borne by that Party, except those relating to transport of the person sought which shall be borne by the Requesting Party.\n\nEntry into Force and Termination\n\nARTICLE 28\n\n1. This Treaty shall come into force on the date on which the Parties have notified each other in writing through the diplomatic channel that their respective domestic requirements for the entry into force have been complied with.\n\n2. Either Party may terminate this Treaty by notice in writing through the diplomatic channel at any time and it shall cease to be in force on the one hundred and eightieth day after the day on which notice is given.\n\n3. On the entry into force of this Treaty the provisions of the Treaty for the Mutual Surrender of Fugitive Criminals between Great Britain and Mexico done at Mexico City on 7 September 1886 shall cease to have effect between Australia and Mexico.\n\n4. Requests for extradition made after this Treaty has entered into force shall be governed by its provisions whatever the date of the commission of the offence.\n\n5. Requests for extradition made before this Treaty has entered into force shall continue to be governed by the Treaty referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article.\n\nIN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Treaty.\n\nDONE in two originals at CANBERRA on the twenty-second day of June One Thousand, Nine Hundred and Ninety in English and Spanish each text being equally authentic.\n\nFOR FOR THE\n\nAUSTRALIA UNITED MEXICAN\n\nSTATES\n\nGARETH EVANS FERNANDOSOLANA\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\nNOTE\n\n1. Notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 26 March 1991.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"These Regulations declare Mexico an extradition country (Regulation 4) and bring the Extradition Act 1988 into operation in relation to Mexico subject to the terms of the Treaty reproduced in the Schedule (Regulation 5). They do not expand or alter the Treaty’s substantive scope; they implement and apply the Extradition Act to Mexico and set out the Treaty’s procedural and substantive rules as the governing framework for extradition between the Parties (Schedule Articles 1–28)."},"complexity_factors":["Treaty contains numerous procedural steps and documentary requirements (Article 15–16) increasing operational complexity","Dual criminality and minimum-penalty threshold require legal comparison of offence elements across systems (Article 2(1), 2(3))","Multiple discretionary refusal or delay points (e.g. political offence exception Article 5; national refusal Article 10; domestic competence Article 11; transit/public policy Article 24)","Time-sensitive rules (60-day limits for provisional arrest and removal, Articles 19(4) and 21(3)–(4)) create scheduling and coordination complexity","Interplay between Treaty provisions and each Party’s domestic law (explicitly stated: e.g. Article 16(2), Article 4), producing variable outcomes and administrative discretion","Concurrent requests rule requires multi-factor balancing by the Requested Party (Article 20)","Human-rights and humanitarian exceptions and death-penalty assurances require judgment calls and negotiations (Articles 13 and 14)","Authentication and legalisation procedures differ by Party and involve diplomatic and consular channels (Article 15)"],"plain_english_summary":"Summary\n\n- What this instrument does, mechanically: The regulations (Statutory Rules 1991 No. 361) declare the United Mexican States (\"Mexico\") to be an extradition country (Regulation 4) and provide that the Extradition Act 1988 applies to Mexico subject to the terms of the Treaty on Extradition between Australia and Mexico signed 22 June 1990 (Regulation 5 and the Schedule). The Schedule reproduces the full Treaty text setting out the legal rules and procedures for requests, provisional arrest, documentary requirements, grounds for refusal, surrender, specialty, property, transit, expenses, and entry into force.\n\nKey operational elements (where in the instrument)\n\n- Who may request and who decides: Each Party may request extradition; the Requested State (Australia when it receives a Mexican request, Mexico when it receives an Australian request) decides whether to extradite in accordance with the Treaty and its own laws (Schedule Articles 1, 11, 21). The Requested Party must communicate its decision through diplomatic channels and give reasons if extradition is refused (Article 21(1)–(2)). Several provisions create explicit decision points or discretion for the Requested Party (e.g. Article 4, Article 11, Article 20, Article 24).\n\n- What is extraditable: Offences punishable in both States by at least one year’s maximum imprisonment are extraditable (Article 2(1)). Convicted persons are extraditable only if at least six months of a custodial sentence remain (Article 2(2)). Multilateral treaty offences and revenue-related offences can also be extraditable (Articles 3 and 4).\n\n- Mandatory documentary and authentication requirements: Extradition requests must be in writing through diplomatic channels (Article 15(1)) and accompanied by specified documents (Article 16), including a statement of acts, arrest warrants or conviction records, legal basis and penalties, identity details, and translations into the Requested State’s language (Article 16(1)). Authentication rules differ by Party and include certification and legalisation steps (Article 15).\n\n- Provisional arrest and time limits: In urgent cases a provisional arrest may be requested and may be made by any written means; the Requested State must act to secure arrest (Article 19). If the full request and supporting documents are not received within 60 days the provisionally arrested person may be discharged (Article 19(4)). After extradition is granted, the Requesting Party must remove the person within 60 days or the person must be released (Article 21(3)–(4)).\n\n- Grounds to refuse or limit extradition: The Treaty lists exceptions and safeguards: political offences and cases where prosecution/punishment would be for prohibited reasons (Article 5); purely military offences (Article 6); previous final judgment, pardon or served sentence (Article 7); statutes of limitation or similar bars (Article 8); trials by special/extraordinary tribunals (Article 9); refusal to extradite nationals (Article 10); domestic competence to try the offence (Article 11); convictions in absence require assurances of fair defence (Article 12); death-penalty cases require assurances sufficient to the Requested Party (Article 13); human-rights and humanitarian exceptions (Article 14).\n\n- Specialty rule and follow-on prosecutions: A person extradited may not be tried or detained for offences other than that for which extradition was granted, nor be extradited to a third State for prior offences, except in limited circumstances or with the Requested Party’s consent (Article 18).\n\n- Property, transit and expenses: The Requested Party shall, to the extent its laws permit, secure and deliver evidence or proceeds of crime on request (Article 23). Transit through the other Party’s territory requires permission; the transit State may refuse for public policy reasons or if the person is its national (Article 24). Ordinary expenses incurred in the Requested Party are borne by that Party; transport of the person is borne by the Requesting Party (Article 27).\n\nWhy this matters (stated purpose and practical consequences)\n\n- The instrument creates a legal framework for mutual surrender of people between Australia and Mexico by: (a) incorporating the Extradition Act's operation in relation to Mexico (Regulation 5) and (b) embedding the Treaty rules that govern what counts as an extraditable offence, how requests must be made and authenticated, what protections and exceptions are available, and who bears what costs (Schedule Articles 1–28).\n\n- Who pays and who acts: The Requested State bears local costs of extradition processes generally but not transport (Article 27). Requesting States must prepare authenticated, translated documentation (Articles 15–16) and use diplomatic channels (Article 15(1)), imposing administrative and translation costs on the Requesting State. The Requested State’s authorities and courts exercise decision-making power and discretion on many points (e.g. Article 4, Article 11, Article 20, Article 24).\n\n- Incentives, burdens and trade-offs: The Treaty conditions extradition on dual criminality and a minimum severity threshold (Article 2), creating an incentive for Requesting States to frame requests to match offences recognised in both systems. Documentary, authentication and translation obligations (Articles 15–16) increase administrative compliance costs for Requesting Parties. The Requested Party’s ability to refuse extradition for political or humanitarian reasons (Articles 5 and 14), to refuse to extradite nationals or to prosecute domestically instead (Article 10), and to require assurances in death-penalty cases (Article 13) are procedural checks that can delay or prevent surrender. These checks allocate costs between States (e.g. investigation and prosecution costs) and create negotiation points (assurances, evidence exchange).\n\n- Implementation and operational risks: Time limits (60 days for provisional arrest and removal, Articles 19(4) and 21(3)–(4)) create deadlines that, if missed, can release a person and require new proceedings. Many provisions depend on the Requested Party’s domestic law (“to the extent permitted by the law of the Requested Party”, Article 16(2); Article 4), which introduces variability and administrative discretion. Concurrent requests from multiple States require the Requested Party to prioritise among claimants using listed factors, creating practical and legal choices (Article 20).\n\nPractical effects on private behaviour and institutions\n\n- Law enforcement and prosecutors must prepare authenticated and translated dossiers to meet the Treaty’s documentary standards (Articles 15–16).\n- Courts and administrative agencies in the Requested State will apply domestic law and Treaty rules to decide extradition, with specific timelines and duties to communicate decisions (Articles 11, 21).\n- Individuals facing extradition gain specified procedural protections: refusal grounds, specialty protections (Article 18), requirements for assurances (Articles 12 and 13), and the right to discharge if procedural deadlines are not met (Article 19(4)).\n\nSelected source citations: Reg 4 (declaration of Mexico); Reg 5 (application of Act subject to Treaty); Treaty Schedule Articles 1–28 (full procedural and substantive rules, including Articles 2, 5, 10, 12–16, 18–24, 27–28)."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation remains tightly scoped to its original purpose of implementing the 1990 Australia-Mexico Extradition Treaty. The regulations declare Mexico an extradition country and apply the Extradition Act 1988 subject to the treaty terms. The scheduled treaty text covers standard extradition matters (offences, exceptions, procedures) without expanding into unrelated areas such as mutual legal assistance, prisoner transfer, or law enforcement cooperation beyond extradition."},"complexity_factors":["Bilateral treaty structure with 28 articles requiring cross-referencing between regulations and scheduled treaty text","Multiple conditional exceptions to extradition (Articles 5-14) with nested discretionary grounds (e.g., Article 10 allows refusal for nationals but creates obligation to prosecute domestically instead)","Dual authentication regimes for documents depending on which country makes the request (Article 15)","Rule of speciality (Article 18) contains three explicit exceptions plus an implicit temporal exception for post-extradition offences","Provisional arrest mechanism (Article 19) with strict 60-day deadline that can be extended by subsequent receipt of proper documentation","Concurrent request prioritisation criteria (Article 20) requiring balancing of six different factors with no hierarchy specified","Death penalty assurance requirement (Article 13) creating conditional extradition based on diplomatic undertakings","Transitional provisions (Article 28) governing temporal jurisdiction over offences committed before and after treaty entry into force"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this legislation does:**\n\nThese regulations implement a formal agreement (a treaty) between Australia and Mexico that allows both countries to send suspected or convicted criminals to each other to face trial or serve prison sentences. This is called **extradition** (the legal process of transferring a person from one country to another to face criminal charges or punishment).\n\n**Who it affects:**\n\n- **People accused of serious crimes** who flee from Australia to Mexico, or vice versa\n- **Law enforcement and judicial authorities** in both countries who must process extradition requests\n- **Courts** in Australia that decide whether to approve extradition to Mexico\n\n**Key rules explained:**\n\n- **What crimes qualify:** Generally crimes punishable by at least one year in prison in both countries. This includes financial crimes like tax evasion and customs offences.\n- **When extradition can be refused:**\n  - If the crime is considered \"political\" (except attacks on heads of state)\n  - If the person might face the death penalty (unless Mexico promises not to execute them)\n  - If the person was tried in their absence without a chance to defend themselves\n  - If the person is a national of the country being asked to extradite them (either country can refuse to hand over their own citizens)\n  - If the person would face torture or inhumane treatment\n  - If too much time has passed (statute of limitations)\n  - If the person already served the sentence or was pardoned\n\n- **Special protections:**\n  - A person extradited for one crime **cannot** be tried for a different, earlier crime without permission (this is called the **\"rule of speciality\"**)\n  - Emergency arrests are possible while paperwork is being prepared\n  - Either country can temporarily hold off on surrendering someone if they need to finish local legal proceedings first\n\n- **Practical arrangements:**\n  - Requests must go through official diplomatic channels\n  - Documents must be properly certified and translated\n  - The requesting country pays for transport; the requested country pays for local legal costs\n  - Property related to crimes (evidence or stolen goods) can be transferred between countries\n\n**Why it matters:**\n\nWithout this agreement, someone could commit a serious crime in Australia, flee to Mexico, and effectively escape justice because there would be no legal mechanism to force their return. This treaty ensures criminals cannot hide across the border and promotes cooperation between the two countries' legal systems. It replaced an old 1886 treaty between Britain and Mexico that previously applied to Australia."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations","history":"/api/acts/extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations/history","analysis":"/api/acts/extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/extradition-united-mexican-states-regulations/documents"}}