The refusal of some countries to extradite persons accused or convicted of terrorist act has focused attention on the problems caused by the political offense exception to extradition. Extradition is the process by which one country returns an accused or convicted person found within its borders to another country for trial or punishment. Under the political offense exception, the requested state may, if it considers the crime to be a “political offense,” deny extradition to the requesting state. Protection of political offenses is a recent addition to the ancient practice of extradition. It is the result of two fundamental changes that occurred as European monarchies were replaced by representative governments. First, these governments began to reject what had been a primary intent of extradition, to expedite the return of political offenders, and instead sought to protect dissidents fleeing despotic regimes. Second, countries began to contend that they had no legal or moral duty to extradite offenders without specific agreements creating such obligations. As extradition laws subsequently developed through international treaties, the political offense exception gradually became an accepted principle among Western nations. There is no international consensus, however, as to what constitutes a political offense. For analytical purposes illegal political conduct has traditionally been divided into two categories. “Pure” political offenses are acts perpetrated directly against the government, such as treason and espionage. These crimes are generally recognized as non extraditable, even if not expressly excluded from extradition by the applicable treaty. In contrast, common crimes, such as murder, assault, and robbery, are generally extraditable. However, there are some common crimes that are so inseparable from a political act that the entire offense is regarded as political. These crimes, which are called “relative” political offenses, are generally non extraditable. Despite the widespread acceptance of these analytic constructs, the distinctions are more academic than meaningful. When it comes to real cases, there is no agreement about what transforms a common crime into a political offense and about whether terrorist acts fall within the protection of the exception. Most terrorists claim that their acts do fall under this protection. Nations of the world must now balance the competing needs of political freedom and international public order. It is time to reexamine the political offense exception, as international terrorism eradicates the critical distinctions between political offenses and nonpolitical crimes. The only rational and attainable objective of the exception is to protect the requested person against unfair treatment by the requesting country. The international community needs to find an alternative to the political offense exception that would protect the rights of requested persons and yet not offer terrorists immunity from criminal liability. 1 C 1. In the passage, the author primarily seeks to (A) define a set of terms (B) outline a new approach (C) describe a current problem (D) expose an illegal practice (E) present historical information 2 C 2. According to the passage, when did countries begin to except political offenders from extradition? (A) when the principle of extraditing accused or convicted persons originated (B) when some nations began refusing to extradite persons accused or convicted of terrorist acts (C) when representative governments began to replace European monarchies (D) when countries began to refuse to extradite persons accused or convicted of common crimes (E) when governments began to use extradition to expedite the return of political offenders 3 A 3. Given the discussion in the passage, which one of the following distinctions does the author consider particularly problematic? (A) between common crimes and “relative” political offense (B) between “pure” political offenses and common crimes (C) between “pure” political offenses and “relative” political offenses (D) between terrorist acts and acts of espionage (E) between the political offense exception and other exceptions to extradition 4 B 4. According to the author, the primary purpose of the political offense exception should be to (A) ensure that terrorists are tried for their acts (B) ensure that individuals accused of political crimes are not treated unfairly (C) distinguish between political and nonpolitical offenses (D) limit extradition to those accused of “pure” political offenses (E) limit extradition to those accused of “relative” political offenses 5 D 5. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would agree with which one of the following statements about the political offense exception? (A) The exception is very unpopular. (B) The exception is probably illegal. (C) The exception is used too little. (D) The exception needs rethinking. (E) The exception is too limited. 6 B 6. When referring to a balance between “the competing needs of political freedom and international public order” (lines 54-55) the author means that nations must strike a balance between (A) allowing persons to protest political injustice and preventing them from committing political offenses (B) protecting the rights of persons requested for extradition and holding terrorists criminally liable (C) maintaining the political offense exception to extradition and clearing up the confusion over what is a political offense (D) allowing nations to establish their own extradition policies and establishing an agreed-upon international approach to extradition (E) protecting from extradition persons accused of “pure” political offenses and ensuring the trial of persons accused of “relative” political offenses 7 A 7. The author would most likely agree that the political offense exception (A) has, in some cases, been stretched beyond intended use (B) has been used too infrequently to be evaluated (C) has been a modestly useful weapon again terrorism (D) has never met the objective for which it was originally established (E) has been of more academic than practical value to political dissidents 8 D 8. Which one of the following, if true, would give the author most cause to reconsider her recommendation regarding the political offense exception (lines 62-66)? (A) More nations started refusing to extradite persons accused or convicted of terrorist acts. (B) More nations started extraditing persons accused or convicted of treason, espionage, and other similar crimes. (C) The nations of the world sharply decreased their use of the political offense exception protect persons accused of each of the various types of “pure” political offenses. (D) The nations of the world sharply decreased their use of the political offense exception to protect persons accused of each of the various types of “relative” political offenses. (E) The nations of the world started to disagree over the analytical distinction between “pure” political offenses and “relative” political offenses.

Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 20:27

It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 20:27

Toolkit

Reading Comprehension (RC)

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Nov 20
UCR MBA Impact - Live Q&A with UCR AdCom & Student
07:30 AM PST
-
08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 22
GMAT RC Masterclass
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Nov 23
Conquer Algebra on the GMAT Focus Edition
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Nov 25
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
10:00 AM EST
-
11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

The refusal of some countries to extradite persons accused

1 2

honey1

Joined: 25 Sep 2020

Last visit: 12 May 2021

Posts: 55

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 76

Posts: 55

Kudos: 6

18 Mar 2021, 01:20

Kudos

Bookmarks

why in question 7 option E is wrong
THANK YOU

bM22

Retired Moderator

Joined: 05 May 2016

Last visit: 17 Jul 2025

Posts: 716

Own Kudos:

784

[1]

Given Kudos: 1,316

Location: India

Schools: IIM (A) IIM (A) IIM-A '24 (A) ISB '24 (A)

Products:

Schools: IIM (A) IIM (A) IIM-A '24 (A) ISB '24 (A)

Posts: 716

Kudos: 784

[1]

31 Mar 2021, 13:50

Kudos

Bookmarks

honey1

why in question 7 option E is wrong
THANK YOU

Hi honey1,

Quote:

(E) has been of more academic than practical value to political dissidents

What's mentioned in the passage is : "These crimes, which are called “relative” political offenses, are generally non extraditable. Despite the widespread acceptance of these analytic constructs, the distinctions are more academic than meaningful.", implication being, that its the categorization of political offense to "pure" and "relative" is mostly theoretical and not the political offense exception. Because of these manipulations in what crime is pure political and what's relative, criminal get an easy way out, as they are meant to punish the criminals and not protect them.

Thus A is a better answer.

Hope This Helps.
Thanks.

JYOTISI

Joined: 20 Oct 2022

Last visit: 31 May 2024

Posts: 2

Given Kudos: 63

Posts: 2

Kudos: 0

08 Jul 2023, 15:02

Kudos

Bookmarks

garimavyas

well , here is the OA ,
CCABDBAD.

i will come to this passage after posting a few more passages.

You didn't explain this passage mam.

Posted from my mobile device

agrasan

Joined: 18 Jan 2024

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 534

Own Kudos:

130

Given Kudos: 5,193

Location: India

Products:

Posts: 534

Kudos: 130

07 May 2025, 04:01

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hi experts GMATNinja KarishmaB DmitryFarber

1. In the passage, the author primarily seeks to

(B) outline a new approach

Is option B wrong because author just feels the need to reexamine the political offense exception but doesn't describe any methodology or working steps for it?

Please let me know, I think I did it wrong due to meaning of "outline" only.

agrasan

Joined: 18 Jan 2024

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 534

Own Kudos:

130

Given Kudos: 5,193

Location: India

Products:

Posts: 534

Kudos: 130

07 May 2025, 08:11

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hi KarishmaB

(D) allowing nations to establish their own extradition policies and establishing an agreed-upon international approach to extradition

Is option D wrong because what the option says is simply not supported by the passage?

KarishmaB

Quote:

6. When referring to a balance between “the competing needs of political freedom and international public order” (lines 54-55) the author means that nations must strike a balance between

(A) allowing persons to protest political injustice and preventing them from committing political offenses

(B) protecting the rights of persons requested for extradition and holding terrorists criminally liable

(C) maintaining the political offense exception to extradition and clearing up the confusion over what is a political offense

(D) allowing nations to establish their own extradition policies and establishing an agreed-upon international approach to extradition

(E) protecting from extradition persons accused of “pure” political offenses and ensuring the trial of persons accused of “relative” political offenses

Harsh2111s, doeadeer:

In paragraph 3, the author talks about pure political offences, regular crime and relative political offences (which are unclear). He discusses how governments may take a stand on extradition based on what kind of offence it is and what the terrorists feel. The whole passage till now is about what are extraditable vs non extraditable offences.

Then comes:
"Nations of the world must now balance the competing needs of political freedom and international public order. "

Why are political offences non extraditable? Because nations want to support political freedom.
Why are crimes extraditable? Because nations want to maintain international order.

"needs of political freedom" - freedom of a person to speak/act against an unjust regime
"international public order" - offenders should be legally liable

The nations need to balance these competing needs.
Hence (B) is correct.
(B) protecting the rights of persons requested for extradition and holding terrorists criminally liable

Let's look at (C) and (E):

(C) maintaining the political offense exception to extradition and clearing up the confusion over what is a political offense

The need of international public order is not 'the need of clearing up confusion over definition of political offence'. It is the need of maintaining order and bringing criminals to justice.

(E) protecting from extradition persons accused of “pure” political offenses and ensuring the trial of persons accused of “relative” political offenses

Nations need to balance the competing needs. What are these needs? Protecting pure political offenders is not the need. Protecting the political freedom of people is the need. The action could be protecting pure political offenders. Also, their need is not putting to trial relative political offenders. First of all, there is too much confusion about 'relative'. Secondly, the need of international order means the need to maintain order.

DmitryFarber

Manhattan Prep Instructor

Joined: 22 Mar 2011

Last visit: 08 Nov 2025

Posts: 3,020

Own Kudos:

8,564

Given Kudos: 57

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85 Verified score

Posts: 3,020

Kudos: 8,564

11 May 2025, 15:33

Kudos

Bookmarks

In general, I'd be careful about getting rid of answers based on the initial verb alone. That's not what conveys most of the meaning of the answer. For instance, in this case, can we really make a clear distinction between the author describing something and outlining something? That's not a distinction the GMAT can really test.

As you've said, the problem with B is that there's no new approach. Sure, the author wants us to do something (reexamine), but there's no approach described. They say that "the international community needs to find an alternative," so it's clear that they don't even have a specific alternative in mind. They are just setting up the issues and objecting to the status quo, but they aren't providing a plan.

agrasan

DmitryFarber

Manhattan Prep Instructor

Joined: 22 Mar 2011

Last visit: 08 Nov 2025

Posts: 3,020

Own Kudos:

8,564

[2]

Given Kudos: 57

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85 Verified score

Posts: 3,020

Kudos: 8,564

[2]

11 May 2025, 15:38

Kudos

Bookmarks

That's certainly a valid reason to eliminate D. But a more central reason is that it just doesn't do what we've been asked for. As Karishma laid out, the phrases "political freedom" and "international public order" represent very specific ideas in the passage. The author is trying to balance the political rights of people who might be extradited with the need to prevent terrorism. Any answer that doesn't describe those exact things is wrong.

agrasan

KarishmaB

Quote: