# Being tried twice for the same crime by different countries
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [December 21, 2005, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676 "2005-12-21T20:00:54Z")
**Posts on this page:** 11
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Amok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amok)
#### Post date: [December 21, 2005, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/1 "2005-12-21T20:00:54Z")
So, back in 1985, Mohammed Ali Hamadi was part of some Hezbollah partisans who hijacked a TWA flight from Athens to Rome. During the course of the hijacking the plane touched down in Beirut, and the body of an American was dumped onto the runway. Witnesses later identified Hamadi as the killer. The hijackers were not captured at that time.
Then in 1987, Hamadi was caught in Frankfurt Airport with explosives in his luggage. The US asked Germany to extradite him so he could be tried for murder, but instead he was prosecuted in Germany. He was convicted of both hijacking the plane and the murder of Robert Dean Stethem, the American citizen, and given a life sentence. Hamadi was paroled last Thursday, after serving almost 19 years in prison and returned to Lebanon, his home country. The US is apparently seeking to get him extradited from Lebanon so he can be tried (again) for the murder of Stethem.
I assume there are no double jeopardy problems with a person being tried for a crime by both the US and Germany (or any two sovereign countries), but I’m curious about how often something like this comes up. Are there similar cases where someone has been convicted and spent time in prison in two different countries for the same crime as will happen to Hamadi if he is tried and convicted here?
---
### Author:  [@Nanoda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nanoda)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/2 "2005-12-22T05:15:20Z")
> [@Amok](#):
>
> I assume there are no double jeopardy problems with a person being tried for a crime by both the US and Germany (or any two sovereign countries)
I don’t know about legally, but trying someone for a crime they were convicted of and served time for in another country clearly poses some problems politically. IMHO you’re basically saying you don’t recognize the legal system of the other country.
This news _did_ strike me as very odd, both him being released so soon, and the U.S. declaration to re-try. Like the OP, I’d like to know if this type of thing has happened before. Anyone?
---
### Author:  [@hawthorne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hawthorne)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/3 "2005-12-22T12:12:31Z")
I’m not a lawyer, but I can recall a recent incident where this sort of thing came up. Last month an Australian citizen was executed in Singapore for drug smuggling. A prominent barrister in Australia tried to run a _private_ prosecution and wanted extradition to Australia in order to save his life. IIRC the action failed due to being thought of rather too late in the day, but they are proceding with similar attempts regarding two more Australians on death row in Vietnam.
---
### Author:  [@hawthorne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hawthorne)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/4 "2005-12-22T12:16:56Z")
And here’s a story about it: [http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17479271-29277,00.html](http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17479271-29277,00.html)
---
### Author:  [@kellner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kellner)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/5 "2005-12-22T13:05:14Z")
> [@Nanoda](#):
>
> This news _did_ strike me as very odd, both him being released so soon, and the U.S. declaration to re-try.
It wasn’t that soon. An average life sentence in Germany is about 20 years. Convicts get the first chance of parole after 15 years. Only about one in six will literally stay in prison for the rest of their life.
---
### Author:  [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/6 "2005-12-22T14:51:01Z")
It probably depends on the law of the countries involved. The french criminal code adresses specifically this issue and IIRC you can’t be tried again after you’ve been sentenced and served your sentence in a foreign country for the same crime. But even then, it could depends on the definition of _same crime_. Let’s assume Bin Laden for instance is caught and tried in country X for the unlawful deaths of country X’s citizens in the WTC attack . Could he be latter extradited, tried and sentenced for the unlawful deaths of country Z’s citizens during the same event? I assume this also would depends of both countries’ laws.
---
### Author:  [@Amok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amok)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/7 "2005-12-22T15:35:49Z")
Interesting article, **Hawthorne**. It looks like these lawyers in Australia are looking to charge those people with what is technically a different crime (“conspiring to import heroin into Australia”) though, even if it’s, more or less, for the same basic actions (which ties into **clairobscur’s** point about what’s the same crime). That makes it a bit different from Hamadi’s situation, as he’d be facing the exact same charge (murder) in the US as he faced in Germany, as I understand it.
Anyway, to veer slightly off-topic for a second, what I find odd about Hamadi’s case is that he was tried in Germany to begin with. The practical reason for his being tried there, as I understand it, is that Germany didn’t want to extradite him to the US where he could have faced the death penalty. Fair enough, and I don’t want to debate the rightness of that, as this obviously isn’t the forum for it, but I’m not sure what jurisdictional claim Germany would have had for the murder. Germany, as far as I know, has never claimed “[universal jurisdiction](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction)”. The only thing I can think of, is that while the victim’s body was dumped in Lebanon, the murder itself may have occured in international airspace, thus making it analogous to piracy, or other crimes committed “on the high seas”, that are traditionally able to be tried by any country.
Maybe someone who knows the facts of this case better, or who has more knowledge about extraterritorial jurisdiction, will be by.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/8 "2005-12-22T15:41:55Z")
Many extradition treaties have their own double jeopardy clause. Here is an example from our treaty with Germany:
> [@](#):
>
> Article 8
>
> PRIOR JEOPARDY FOR SAME OFFENSE
>
> Extradition shall not be granted when the person whose extradition is requested has been tried and discharged or punished with final and binding effect by the competent authorities of the Requested State for the offense for which his extradition is requested.
[http://www.internationalextradition.com/germany\_bi.htm](http://www.internationalextradition.com/germany_bi.htm)
So it doesn’t come up much because of that. This case will be especially difficult because the US has no extradition treaty with Lebanon. [http://www.internationalextraditionblog.com/](http://www.internationalextraditionblog.com/) ; [http://www.uncjin.org/Laws/extradit/usa.pdf](http://www.uncjin.org/Laws/extradit/usa.pdf)
With respect to Constitutional double jeopardy, the “dual sovereignty” doctrine holds that prosecution by a separate sovereign entity is no bar to prosecution by the federal government. [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=435&invol=313](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=435&invol=313)
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/9 "2005-12-22T15:52:36Z")
> [@Amok](#):
>
> Interesting article, **Hawthorne**. It looks like these lawyers in Australia are looking to charge those people with what is technically a different crime (“conspiring to import heroin into Australia”) though, even if it’s, more or less, for the same basic actions (which ties into **clairobscur’s** point about what’s the same crime). That makes it a bit different from Hamadi’s situation, as he’d be facing the exact same charge (murder) in the US as he faced in Germany, as I understand it.
>
> Anyway, to veer slightly off-topic for a second, what I find odd about Hamadi’s case is that he was tried in Germany to begin with. The practical reason for his being tried there, as I understand it, is that Germany didn’t want to extradite him to the US where he could have faced the death penalty. Fair enough, and I don’t want to debate the rightness of that, as this obviously isn’t the forum for it, but I’m not sure what jurisdictional claim Germany would have had for the murder. Germany, as far as I know, has never claimed “[universal jurisdiction](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction)”. The only thing I can think of, is that while the victim’s body was dumped in Lebanon, the murder itself may have occured in international airspace, thus making it analogous to piracy, or other crimes committed “on the high seas”, that are traditionally able to be tried by any country.
>
> Maybe someone who knows the facts of this case better, or who has more knowledge about extraterritorial jurisdiction, will be by.
Under the [Hague Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft](http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/hague1970.html) (1970):
> [@](#):
>
> Article 4
>
> 1. Each Contracting State shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offence and any other act of violence against passengers or crew committed by the alleged offender in connection with the offence, in the following cases:
> 1. when the offence is committed on board an aircraft registered in that State;
> 2. when the aircraft on board which the offence is committed lands in its territory with the alleged offender still on board;
> 3. when the offence is committed on board an aircraft leased without crew to a lessee who has his principal place of business or, if the lessee has no such place of business, his permanent residence, in that State.
>
> 2. **Each Contracting State shall likewise take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offence in the case where the alleged offender is present in its territory and it does not extradite him pursuant to Article 8 to any of the States mentioned in paragraph 1 of this Article.**
> 3. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law.
(Emphasis added.)
And
> [@](#):
>
> Article 7
>
> The Contracting State in the territory of which the alleged offender is found shall, if it does not extradite him, be obliged, without exception whatsoever and whether or not the offence was committed in its territory, to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State.
So Germany had the choice of extraditing or prosecuting. If it chose not to extradite, it was bound by the Convention to assert universal jurisdiction and prosecute.
---
### Author:  [@Amok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amok)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/10 "2005-12-22T16:00:28Z")
I did not know that. Thanks, **Gfactor**.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [December 22, 2005, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-tried-twice-for-the-same-crime-by-different-countries/336676/11 "2005-12-22T16:23:16Z")
> [@Amok](#):
>
> I did not know that. Thanks, **Gfactor**.
You’re welcome. I didn’t “know” it either until I remembered something about universal jurisdiction, hijacking, and some treaty. Then I started Googling.