Countries With No Extradition Treaty
Extradition runs on bilateral treaties, and no country has one with every other. Where no treaty exists, surrender is not impossible — it becomes discretionary, and it happens through deportation or immigration removal rather than through a court process that can be contested. The absence of a treaty changes the mechanism and the odds, not the outcome in every case.
“No treaty” is read as “safe”. It is not. Countries without a treaty have removed people on immigration grounds, and an Interpol alert circulates regardless of any treaty. What a treaty changes is whether a court process is available to contest surrender.
By requesting country
Each page below lists the countries with no bilateral treaty with that state, and sets out the practical position alongside the legal one — a country can have no treaty and still cooperate.
- Countries With No Extradition Treaty With the United StatesWhere the US has no bilateral treaty, and what that changes in practice.→
- Countries With No Extradition Treaty With United KingdomWhere United Kingdom has no treaty, and how surrender works when it does not.→
- Countries With No Extradition Treaty With CanadaWhere Canada has no treaty, and how surrender works when it does not.→
- Countries With No Extradition Treaty With AustraliaWhere Australia has no treaty, and how surrender works when it does not.→
- Countries With No Extradition Treaty With IndiaWhere India has no treaty, and how surrender works when it does not.→
- Countries With No Extradition Treaty With ThailandWhere Thailand has no treaty, and how surrender works when it does not.→
What no treaty actually changes
- Court process
- With a treaty, surrender normally runs through a court that can be argued in. Without one, the route is administrative.
- Dual criminality
- Treaties usually require the conduct to be an offence in both states. No treaty means no such filter.
- Political offence bar
- Most treaties exclude political offences. That protection disappears with the treaty.
- Own nationals
- Many states refuse to surrender their own citizens regardless of any treaty.
- Immigration removal
- Deportation is not extradition and is not governed by the treaty at all.
- The alert itself
- Circulates independently. A treaty position does not delete data held in the Organization’s files.
What the alert does in the meantime
Whether a treaty exists or not, the record travels through the same channels and surfaces in the same places — travel consequences of a red notice.
The treaty position is only half the question
The other half is whether the data should be in the Organization’s files at all. Legal help if a red notice was issued.
Request a free case assessmentFrequently asked
Does a country without a treaty ignore red notices?
No. The alert reaches every member country’s bureau, treaty or not. What the absence of a treaty removes is the formal route by which the person could be surrendered afterwards.
Can you be extradited without a treaty?
In some jurisdictions yes, on the basis of reciprocity or domestic law. More commonly the person is removed on immigration grounds instead, which achieves a similar result without a court hearing.
What is the dual criminality rule?
The requirement that the conduct alleged be an offence in both states. It is a standard treaty condition and a common ground of challenge.
Does citizenship protect against extradition?
In several states the constitution bars surrender of nationals. It does not bar prosecution at home for the same conduct.
Which countries refuse to extradite their own nationals?
A substantial group, including much of continental Europe and several large jurisdictions elsewhere. The rule is usually constitutional rather than discretionary.