English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Constitutions of new countries are expected to facilitate extradition relations as well as other modalities of international judicial cooperation with other countries. This is specifically important for countries, such as Somaliland, which seek recognition of their independence. However, in some cases, their Constitutional provisions do not succeed in materializing the right balance between national interests and the interest in fighting crime at the international level. As a result, the Constitution of such countries may even hurdle efficient extradition relation and eventually, isolate the country from the joint struggle against crime. This seems to be the case of Article 35 (3) of the Somaliland Constitution, in particular. This research paper is designed to explain the weaknesses of the aforementioned Paragraph 3 and provide some ideas for its improvement.

Extradition and Constitution (Article 35.3 of the Somaliland Constitution)