HomeIs there an extradition agreement between Dubai and the USA in 2026?
The question of the possibility of extradition from Dubai to the United States requires a deep understanding of international criminal law, as it falls within the realm of indirect regulation. The widespread belief that the absence of a bilateral agreement ensures immunity from prosecution is a legal misconception. Law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and UAE have developed effective mechanisms for transferring accused individuals, relying on supranational conventions and the principle of reciprocity. The absence of a direct treaty merely changes the procedural form of interaction, transforming the obligation to extradite into a discretionary right of the state.
The absence of a contract and national legislation
The United States and the United Arab Emirates do not have a ratified bilateral extradition treaty. In classical jurisdiction, this means that Washington lacks the tool for automatically requesting the extradition of an individual, and the judicial authorities of Dubai have no contractual obligations to fulfill such requests. However, the legal vacuum in this area is illusory.
The procedure is regulated by UAE Federal Law No. 39 of 2006 On International Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters. This regulatory act grants the competent authorities of the Emirates the authority to satisfy requests from foreign states even in the absence of a bilateral agreement. The basis for cooperation is a diplomatic request and guarantees of reciprocity. The Dubai Public Prosecution reviews such cases on an individual basis, assessing not only the legal validity of the request but also the current direction of bilateral diplomatic relations.
The principle of reciprocity and conventional mechanisms
Instead of direct extradition, a mechanism based on the principle of comity of nations (international courtesy) and reciprocity is applied. The U.S. Department of Justice sends a request through diplomatic channels, confirming its readiness to similarly consider a reciprocal request from the UAE in the future.
A significant legal basis for extradition is provided by multilateral international treaties. If the alleged act falls under the scope of the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000) or the UN Convention against Corruption, to which both countries are parties, these documents serve as a surrogate for a bilateral treaty. This is especially relevant for cases related to money laundering, drug trafficking, and cybercrime.
Criteria for the admissibility of request satisfaction
The judicial practice of the UAE demonstrates a strict approach to filtering foreign extradition requests. The Dubai Court of Cassation sanctions extradition only with strict compliance with the set of conditions established in national legislation.
Key requirements for initiating the procedure include the following aspects:
- compliance with the principle of double criminality, under which the act is classified as a criminal offense in both jurisdictions;
- the severity of the offense must provide for punishment in the form of imprisonment for a term of at least one year in accordance with the legislation of both states;
- the provision by the requesting party of sufficient evidence that would meet the standards of prima facie (sufficiency of evidence to initiate legal proceedings);
- the absence of a political nature in the crime, which often becomes the subject of complex legal debates in court;
- Guarantees of non-application of the death penalty if the legislation of the requesting state or federal legislation of the USA provides for the highest measure of punishment.
Administrative deportation as an alternative to extradition
In the legal environment, there is a term “hidden extradition.” The UAE authorities often use the mechanism of administrative deportation for the expedited transfer of individuals posing a threat to national or financial security. This procedure allows bypassing the lengthy stages of judicial appeals provided for by the extradition law.
The process is initiated by recognizing the presence of a foreign citizen in the UAE as undesirable. The basis for this can be a threat to public order or a violation of immigration regulations. After the visa is annulled, immediate deportation follows. Technically, this appears as expulsion to the country of citizenship or a third country; however, in practice, the route is often coordinated with American intelligence services. The precedent with Nigerian citizen Ramon Abbas (Hushpuppi) confirms the effectiveness of this method: the suspect was handed over to FBI agents and transported to the U.S. in less than a month after his arrest, bypassing the classic extradition court.
Comparative analysis of legal regimes
To assess risks, it is necessary to clearly distinguish the extradition procedure in the presence of a treaty and in its absence (the current situation between the USA and UAE).
| Comparison criterion | Bilateral agreement mode | Reciprocity mode (current status) |
|---|---|---|
| Mandatory execution | Imperative (obligation to issue upon compliance with conditions) | Discretionary (the right to issue, based on goodwill) |
| Burden of proof | Formal verification of documents | In-depth verification of the factual circumstances of the case |
| Procedure timelines | Regulated, accelerated process | Unpredictable, can drag on for years |
| Political levers | Minimized by the text of the contract | Play a decisive role in decision-making |
Immunity and constitutional limitations
The legislation of the UAE contains imperative norms that exclude the extradition of certain categories of individuals. Article 38 of the UAE Constitution establishes an absolute prohibition on the extradition of its own citizens. In the event that a UAE citizen commits a crime on the territory of the United States, they are subject to trial in the Emirates. In such situations, the American side is compelled to transfer the criminal case materials to the UAE Public Prosecution for local prosecution (the principle of aut dedere aut judicare — “either extradite or prosecute”).
Additional protection is granted to individuals who have obtained refugee status or proven the political motivation behind their persecution. However, the burden of proving the political context lies entirely on the defense. Lawyers must provide irrefutable evidence that the U.S. request is not aimed at justice but at persecution for beliefs, racial identity, or political activity.
The influence of FATF and the tightening of compliance
The modern vector of law enforcement in the UAE is aimed at strengthening the fight against financial crimes to comply with FATF (Financial Action Task Force) standards. The Emirates actively demonstrate transparency and readiness for cooperation. This has led to U.S. requests regarding cases of securities fraud, cryptocurrency scams, and money laundering being given priority attention. Financial crimes are no longer perceived by local courts solely as civil disputes, which significantly increases the risk of granting extradition requests for “white-collar” categories.
Necessary actions during extradition
The absence of an extradition treaty between the USA and Dubai creates not a safety zone but a complex legal environment with high risks of unpredictable outcomes. The use of Interpol mechanisms (Red Notice) allows UAE authorities to detain suspects until circumstances are clarified, which can lead to prolonged detention even without eventual extradition.
Persons with potential legal conflicts with the jurisdiction of the USA require preventive legal protection. Passive waiting in this situation is unacceptable.
Consult international lawyers for professional advice to assess risks and check status in Interpol databases. A timely defense strategy can prevent detention and block the extradition process at an early stage.
