Sentencing Foreign Nationals For Crimes

There has been a fuss raised over Texas executing a Mexican National. I will not debate here the lack of merit of that action, it has none. The person had dual citizenship, lived as and considered himself an American citizen until his lawyer saw his Mexican citizenship was a way to avoid the death penalty. I must give President Fox credit for one thing. When he went to Africa recently he protested their use of the death penalty. He is consistent in his opposition. But American citizens are executed by other countries for every reason under the sun including those who have been executed for practicing their faith. When overseas they are exposed to terror attacks by every kook group under the sun. Something needs to be done with this, maybe if we start executing foreign nationals with the same fervor that other nations execute ours, maybe someone else will get interested. But I have a better way.

I believe justice would be better served if rule by international law would be applied to people accused of crimes in another country. One suggestion I have had with this over the years is for the host country – (where the crime occurred – the US in the case I cited above) to arrest, try, convict, and sentence a person for the crime. And when the trial ends, they would be jailed in the host country with no parole pending action by an international review board. Exercising the death penalty would be placed on hold. During this time appeals can be filed but the person remains in jail unless the host country decides to issue parole. The person is forbidden to leave the host country and if they do, any country participating including the native country would allow summary extradition. When the person is satisfied that the appeals have run their course the case would be submitted to an international panel. There legal experts from the host and home countries compare the sentence imposed by the host country and possibility of parole during that sentence for that crime in both the host and home country. They set the sentence based on what the person would get for that crime at home under like circumstances. At that point the person can be returned to serve the sentence there if he chooses or remain in the host country to serve their sentence. For example if the person got the maximum sentence the host country could sentence to, the maximum at home would be set even if that were a different number of years. Likewise if he got the minimum he would serve the minimum for his home country. If the host country sentence were longer it would only have an impact if he were released early at home and then returned to the host country. If he decides to appeal he can return to the host country to appeal but no appeals can be made unless he returns.