The requirement of ‘actual hostilities
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2025 8:18 am
The historic justifications for the political exception rule are as valid today as they were during the 19th century or the trustee period of the mid 20th century. In an increasingly globalized world greater oversight is indispensible and the whistleblower fills that lacuna. Often, however, domestic whistleblower protection is inadequate, if not a sham (Obama’s Abuse at 2) and whistleblowers are forced to look to other states for protection. Invariably, whistleblowers will be charged with ‘relative phone number list political offenses’ sounding in theft of government secrets so they cannot look to the ‘pure political offense’ protection to evade extradition.
The U.S. provides among the least protection, persisting in the traditional interpretation of the “incidence” test, while many other states have evolved their standards. in progress’ operates to foreclose whistleblowers’ recourse to this exception despite their legitimate efforts and motivations to change government policy, under all but the most extreme circumstances. Moreover, the type of charges usually arising during hostilities are of such a violent nature that they would also otherwise be exempt from extradition protection.
The U.S. provides among the least protection, persisting in the traditional interpretation of the “incidence” test, while many other states have evolved their standards. in progress’ operates to foreclose whistleblowers’ recourse to this exception despite their legitimate efforts and motivations to change government policy, under all but the most extreme circumstances. Moreover, the type of charges usually arising during hostilities are of such a violent nature that they would also otherwise be exempt from extradition protection.