Extradition from the UAE: Ten Grounds That Bar Surrender
Most extradition files reach a lawyer in the same way: a detention at the airport, or a bank that suddenly asks questions, and behind it a foreign request or an Interpol notice. The decision that follows is not discretionary. UAE law sets out conditions without which surrender cannot even be considered, and a list of grounds on which surrender must be refused. Knowing which of them applies to the facts is the whole of the defence.
The framework, and what sits above it
Extradition from the UAE is governed by Federal Law No. 39 of 2006 on International Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters, as amended by Federal Decree-Law No. 38 of 28 September 2023, which replaced Articles 2 and 5. The amendment changed how central authorities interact; it did not touch the substantive grounds of refusal. Two points shape every file. First, the Law applies without prejudice to international conventions to which the State is a party, and on the basis of reciprocity — where a bilateral treaty exists, the treaty prevails on any conflict. Second, the Law gives no foreign state a right to demand that the UAE take any co-operation step: a request is a request, not an entitlement.
The threshold: dual criminality and the one-year rule
Before any assessment of the merits, the request has to clear a threshold set by Article 7. The offence must be punishable under the law of the requesting state by a custodial penalty of at least one year or a more severe penalty, and the same act, if committed in the UAE, must constitute an offence punishable by a custodial penalty of at least one year. This is where a significant number of commercial and regulatory files fail: conduct that is criminal in the requesting state may have no equivalent offence in UAE law, and a request built on a lower penalty range does not meet the rule. The comparison is made on the substance of the act, not on the label the foreign file puts on it.
The ten mandatory grounds of refusal
Article 9 lists the grounds on which extradition shall not be granted. They are absolute: where one applies, the court is bound to refuse. Surrender is barred where the requested person holds UAE nationality; where UAE law confers jurisdiction over the offence on the national judicial authorities; where the offence is political or connected with a political offence — with terrorism, war crimes, genocide, offences against the Head of State, the Vice-President, members of the Supreme Council or their families, the Prime Minister and internationally protected persons expressly excluded from that category; where the offence consists solely of a breach of military duty; where there are serious grounds to believe the request was made to prosecute or punish a person on account of race, religion, nationality or political opinion, or that surrender would worsen that person position for any of those reasons; where an investigation or trial for the same offence is already under way in the UAE; where the person has been tried and acquitted, or convicted and has served the sentence; where a final judgment on the offence has been issued by the UAE courts; where prosecution or the penalty is time-barred; and where the person has been, or may be, subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, or a penalty disproportionate to the gravity of the offence, or would not be afforded the minimum guarantees of criminal procedure.
Where limitation periods bite — and where they do not
The time-bar ground is one of the most frequently decisive and one of the most frequently mishandled. The Law does not state by whose law limitation is measured; because Article 4 refers matters not covered by the Law to the Criminal Procedure Law and related legislation, the UAE limitation rules apply. In the parallel provision on mutual legal assistance the Law expressly takes account of limitation under the law of both states, which supports the same approach by analogy. Two categories sit outside the argument altogether: limitation does not apply to terrorist offences under the anti-terrorism legislation, nor to international crimes under the decree-law on international crimes. In those files the defence has to be built on the discrimination ground and on the risk of torture or an unfair trial rather than on the passage of time.
Postponement, specialty and assurances
Three further mechanisms shape the outcome. Where the requested person is under investigation or on trial in the UAE for a different offence, surrender is postponed until those proceedings end by an irrevocable judgment, and where the person is convicted, until the sentence has been served; temporary surrender is possible if the requesting state undertakes to return the person promptly. The rule of specialty prevents the requesting state from prosecuting the surrendered person for offences committed before surrender and not covered by the request, or from passing that person to a third state, unless the person had thirty days to leave and did not, or voluntarily returned, or the UAE Minister of Justice consents on a fresh formal request. And save for offences carrying doctrinal penalties, the State may obtain an assurance from the requesting state that the death penalty will not be carried out; in cases carrying Qisas the waiver of the heirs is required.
What to do in the first days
The first task is documentary: obtain a copy of the request and its annexes, and read what the foreign file actually alleges — the characterisation of the act, the dates, which matter for limitation, and the evidence relied on. The second is to establish whether a bilateral treaty is in force between the UAE and the requesting state, because a convention prevails over the domestic Law where they conflict. The third is a structured audit against each of the ten grounds, recorded as a memorandum rather than as arguments raised piecemeal at the hearing. Where the discrimination ground or the risk of ill-treatment is in play, the evidence has to be assembled deliberately: reports of international organisations and human rights bodies, country reports, witness statements, medical evidence. The decision on extradition is subject to appeal, and the appellate route should be treated as part of the strategy from the outset, not as a fallback.
A notice is not a judgment
An Interpol notice is a request for co-operation circulated between police authorities. It is not a judicial decision, it is not an arrest warrant of the UAE, and it does not by itself resolve any of the questions the extradition court has to answer. In practice, though, it is what produces the consequences clients feel first: problems at the border, refused account opening, complications with residence formalities. The two tracks therefore run in parallel — the challenge to the notice through the mechanism provided by Interpol own rules, and the defence to the request itself before the UAE courts. Treating them as one, or dealing with the second only after the first is resolved, usually costs time that the file does not have.
How we work on these matters
We act for individuals facing a request or a notice, and for businesses whose officers are affected. The work is built around the file rather than around general submissions: obtaining and analysing the request, mapping the facts against Article 7 and each ground under Article 9, checking the treaty position, assembling country and personal evidence where the discrimination or ill-treatment grounds are engaged, and preparing the appeal route. Where the matter also touches frozen accounts, a travel restriction or a parallel commercial dispute, those elements are handled together, because a step taken in one of them can decide the other. Matters are handled in Russian, English and Arabic. This material states federal legislation as at September 2026 and is general information rather than advice on a specific case, whose outcome depends on the request, the treaty position and the facts.
Where we handle matters like this
Interpol & International Warrants
Challenging Interpol Red Notices, defence against extradition, removal of entry bans. We work directly with the Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files (CCF).
Explore practice →Criminal Defence
Defence in criminal proceedings in the UAE: fraud, breach of trust, embezzlement, cybercrimes. We enter the case at any stage — from the first interrogation to appeal.
Explore practice →