Extradition in Uzbekistan: Balancing State Sovereignty, Human Rights, And Transnational Criminal Justice

The contemporary evolution of extradition law reflects a deeper structural transformation of international criminal justice under conditions of globalization, digitalization, and fragmentation of sovereign legal authority. Classical extradition doctrine historically developed within a territorially bounded legal order premised upon reciprocal interstate cooperation, procedural autonomy of sovereign states, and geographically localized criminal conduct. However, the expansion of cyber-enabled criminality, supranational human rights jurisprudence, and transnational judicial governance has increasingly destabilized the conceptual foundations of traditional extradition mechanisms. This article examines the extradition framework of the Republic of Uzbekistan as a representative example of a transitional post-Soviet legal system undergoing partial judicialization under the influence of international human rights standards and technologically deterritorialized criminality. The study argues that the principal contemporary crisis of extradition law lies not merely in procedural inefficiency, but in the growing incompatibility between territorially structured sovereignty and transnational forms of criminal conduct operating across fragmented digital jurisdictions. Particular attention is devoted to the persistence of prosecutorial centralization within extradition proceedings, the incomplete redistribution of coercive authority toward judicial institutions, and the gradual constitutionalization of extradition through supranational human rights constraints. Using comparative, doctrinal, and systemic methods, the article analyzes the interaction between national criminal procedure, international treaty obligations, judicial review mechanisms, and digital criminality. The study concludes that modernization of extradition in Uzbekistan requires not simply procedural reform, but conceptual restructuring of extradition itself as a human-rights-constrained mechanism of transnational criminal governance operating beyond the classical territorial paradigm of criminal jurisdiction.

Extradition, transnational criminal justice, sovereignty

Доклад УНП ООН: организованная преступность стала глобальной угрозой // https://news.un.org/ru/story/2025/11/1466811

Жиноят процессуал ҳуқуқ: Дарслик. Муаллифлар жамоаси. - Тошкент: ТДЮУ, 2021. - Б. 751–753.

Сайфулов Р.А. Экстрадиция в уголовном процессе (по материалам МВД и Прокуратуры Республики Узбекистан): Автореф. дис. ... канд. юрид. наук. - Ташкент, 2001. - С. 10.

Умархонова Д.Ш. Жиноят содир қилган шахсларни экстрадиция қилишнинг халқаро-ҳуқуқий асослари // Ўзбекистон қонунчилиги таҳлили - Uzbek Law Review. - 2018. - № 3–4. - С. 66–67.

Уголовно-процессуальный кодекс Республики Узбекистан. Статьи 599–608 // Национальная база данных законодательства Республики Узбекистан

Конвенция о правовой помощи и правовых отношениях по гражданским, семейным и уголовным делам (Минская конвенция). - Минск, 22 января 1993 г. Вступила в силу для Республики Узбекистан 17 сентября 1999 г.

Кишинёвская конвенция о правовой помощи и правовых отношениях по гражданским, семейным и уголовным делам. - Кишинёв, 7 октября 2002 г.

Сравнительный анализ практики экстрадиции в государствах - членах СНГ / Исполнительный комитет СНГ. - 2023. - С. 145.

Статистический отчёт Генеральной прокуратуры Республики Узбекистан. - Ташкент, 2025.

Bassiouni M.C. International Extradition: United States Law and Practice. 6th ed. - New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Gilbert G. Transnational Fugitive Offenders in International Law: Extradition and Other Mechanisms The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1998 // https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-international-law/article/abs/transnational-fugitive-offenders-in-international-law-extradition-and-other-mechanisms-international-studies-in-human-rights-vol-55-by-geoff-gilbert-the-hague-boston-london-martinus-nijhoff-publishers-1998-pp-xxxi-479-index-fl-235-127-86/A880BECB740E93F240CEC4AE65A9C1A4

Shaw M.N. International Law. 8th ed. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. - P. 512–540. // https://www.gbv.de/dms/spk/sbb/toc/889695296.pdf

Chahal v. United Kingdom: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, 15 November 1996. Reports 1996-V // https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/chahal-v-uk.php

Петров А.В. Международное сотрудничество в сфере уголовного судопроизводства. - М.: Юрид. лит., 2022. - С. 298 // http://www.dslib.net/kriminal-process/mezhdunarodno-pravovaja-pomow-po-ugolovnym-delam-kak-institut- ugolovno.html

Soering v. United Kingdom: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, 7 July 1989. Series A, No. 161.

Международный обзор процессуальных гарантий в делах об экстрадиции / УНП ООН. - Вена, 2023. - С. 178;