Exploring Atypical Citizenship Deprivation and Spillover Effects concerns about his potential extradition, arguing that it would violate arts 3 and 6(1) of the ECHR, 112 being the prohibition of torture and right to a fair trial respectively. Specifically, he claimed that extradition to China could result in torture, inhumane and degrading treatment, and the absence of a fair trial. 113 Additionally, he filed a complaint under art 5(1) (right to liberty and security), asserting that his pre-extradition detention was unreasonably prolonged and amounted to arbitrariness.114 The ECtHR determined that the applicant’s detention did not meet the criteria of ‘lawfulness’ as defined in art 5(1)(f) of the ECHR,115 considering the purpose of extradition proceedings and unwarranted delays within the Polish legal proceedings.116 The arrest of a state’s citizen invokes an international norm regarding consular rights. According to art 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention, the receiving state must promptly notify the sending state’s consular post upon the arrest or detention of the sending state’s national, forwarding their communications and informing them of their rights. 117 However, as discussed, Taiwan’s irregular sovereignty means its government faces difficulties in practicing these consular rights in foreign territories. In the case of extradition, the PRC may have the right to request the enforcement based on the agreements with different states, but this should not affect the ROC’s consular right for communication with its nationals. The exclusion of a state and the mis-recognition of its citizenship, here for example with the ROC, results in mistreatment towards the Taiwanese people at the international level. Given Taiwan’s diplomatic challenges internationally, Taiwanese individuals seeking protection in foreign lands often need to seek remedies at the individual level, such as resorting to domestic and international human rights laws. While consular rights are usually a matter of international public law between states, the American Convention on Human Rights has recognised them as human rights, particularly in relation to due process.118 By contrast, neither the ECHR nor the ECtHR have explicitly recognised consular rights for foreign nationals. This article does not propose extending such rights under the ECHR; rather, it underscores the predicaments faced by citizens of contested sovereignties who lack adequate diplomatic protection. 2 Challenges to Sovereignty: The Role of Extradition This extradition case does not revolve around the statehood of Taiwan or the broader conflicts between Taiwan and China. However, in recent years, deportations and extraditions of Taiwanese individuals to China have been employed as a measure by the Chinese Government to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty. Between 2016 and 2019, the non-governmental organisation (‘NGO’) Safeguard Defenders recorded 600 cases of Taiwanese nationals abroad facing 112 113 114 115 ECHR (n 76) arts 3, 6(1). Liu v Poland (n 9) [1], [9], [10], [25]. ibid [1], [85]; ECHR (n 76) art 5(1). ECHR (n 76) art 5(1)(f): ‘The lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition.’ 116 Liu v Poland (n 9) [104]. 117 See, eg, LaGrand (Germany v United States of America) (Judgement) [2001] ICJ Rep 466; Vienna Convention (n 39) art 36(1)(b). 118 The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law (Advisory Opinion) (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, OC-16/99, 1 October 1999) [1], [66], [87], [117]–[124]. 121