ABSTRACT The early twentieth century was a formative legislative era for the rendition of fugitives across the globe. Yet, imperial regimes were often unable to extradite fugitives. This paper draws upon a key extradition case in Trinidad involving fugitives from French Guiana penal colony who won their appeal case to avoid extradition – Kossekechatko and others v. Attorney General for Trinidad. The paper highlights how the case and its aftermath gave rise to imperial tensions. These pressures were between the rights of the imperial state to remove fugitive convicts who were cast as ‘undesirable’ individuals, the legality of deporting ‘criminal aliens’ accused of extraditable offences, and the right of refuge for French Guiana fugitive convicts as advocated by humanitarian groups. The paper shows how imperial policymakers attempted to manage this tension. It argues that the state’s right to remove fugitive convicts triumphed when reforming imperial policy on extradition and that the Trinidad government strategically deployed both policy and philanthropic groups to remove fugitives rather than grant them refuge. As an increased international condemnation of the French Guiana regime remained in the background of the case, the example of French Guiana fugitives arriving in Trinidad therefore provides an apt window onto these imperial tensions and their resolution.

中文翻译：

---

在敌对中寻求庇护：加勒比地区的“不列颠自由岛”和驱逐逃犯的权利

摘要 20 世纪初期是在全球范围内引渡逃犯的形成性立法时代。然而，帝国政权往往无法引渡逃犯。本文借鉴了特立尼达的一起关键引渡案件，该案件涉及法属圭亚那流放地的逃犯，他们在上诉案件中胜诉以避免引渡——Kossekechatko 和其他人诉特立尼达总检察长。该论文强调了此案及其后果如何引起帝国紧张局势。这些压力介于帝国国家驱逐被定为“不受欢迎”的逃犯的权利、驱逐被指控犯有可引渡罪行的“犯罪外国人”的合法性，以及人道主义法倡导的法属圭亚那逃犯的避难权之间的压力。组。这篇论文展示了帝国决策者如何试图控制这种紧张局势。它认为，在改革帝国引渡政策时，国家驱逐逃犯的权利取得了胜利，特立尼达政府战略性地部署了政策和慈善团体来驱逐逃犯，而不是给予他们庇护。由于国际社会对法属圭亚那政权的谴责不断增加，因此法属圭亚那逃犯抵达特立尼达的例子为了解这些帝国紧张局势及其解决方案提供了一个恰当的窗口。