Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:37:31.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Supreme Court of Mexico: Decision on the Extradition of Ricardo Miguel Cavallo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Luis Bena Vides
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
Judicial and Similar Proceedings
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , July 2003 , pp. 884 - 914
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2003

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.)

Footnotes

*

Luis Benavides is a Ph.D candidate at the Institut Universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales, Geneva, Switzerland and the ILM Corresponding Editor for International Criminal Law. The author wishes to thank Gregorio Dionis of Equipo Nizkor for his helpful comments.

References

Endnotes

1 Cf. U.K. House of Lords: Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Ex parte Pinochet) 37ILM 1302 (1998); U.K. High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division: In Re Augusto Pinochet Ugarte 38 ILM 70 (1999); United Kingdom House of Lords: In re Pinochet 38 ILM 432 (1999); U.K. Bow Street Magistrates’ Court: The Kingdom of Spain v. Augusto Pinochet Ugarte 39 ILM 135 (2000).

2 Due to the length of the decision, more than 1000 pages, and the several legal arguments raised in it, I will only briefly explain those that are relevant to the international legal point of view. Cf. Extradición Ricardo Miguel Cavallo, Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, Amparo en Revisión 140/2002,10 Junto 2003, at: <http://www.scjn.gob.mx/Asuntos/2003/CAVALLOENGROSE(X)2.pdf> visited June 2003.

3 42 ILM 683 (2003).

4 Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo sobre el caso Perú por genocidio. 20 de Mayo de 2003 at <http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/peru/doc/tsperu.html.>

1 Amparo en revision. “The amparo procedure applies to violations of the numerous guarantees of individual freedoms, whether by government agencies or by the judiciary.” Dahl's Law Dictionary/Diccionario Juridico Dahl, Second Edition.

* This document was reproduced and reformatted from the text appearing at the Mexico Supreme Court website (visited August 25, 2003) <http://www.scjn.gob.mx>. Due to the considerable length of the decision, the following translation contains excerpts of the decision, including the Court's summary of its holding (set forth in the beginning of the decision), along with sections of the decision addressing issues of international law. The full text of the decision in Spanish is available on the Mexican Supreme Court's website: <http://www.scjn.gob.mx/Asuntos/2003/CAVALLOENGROSE(X)2.pdf>.