Extradition from Argentina: How the Procedure Works and What an Extradition Lawyer Does

If you or a relative has been arrested, do not assume that an INTERPOL Red Notice is itself a final extradition order, or that release follows automatically after the first month. The first tasks are to identify whether the authorities have only requested provisional arrest or have submitted the formal extradition request, obtain the court file, and appoint Argentine defence counsel. For the general international stages, see how extradition works from request to final decision.

Which law applies to an extradition request involving Argentina?

Article 2 of Law No. 24,767 gives priority to an applicable treaty for the matters it regulates; the statute helps interpret the treaty and fills gaps it does not cover. If no extradition treaty applies, Article 3 makes cooperation subject to the existence or offer of reciprocity. A lawyer should therefore identify the requesting state and the exact instrument before calculating deadlines or assessing nationality, evidence, detention, and refusal rules. Treaty rules can differ from the statute, including the period allowed for a formal request after provisional arrest.

Under Article 6, the default double-criminality and penalty test is that the conduct must be an offence under both Argentine law and the requesting state’s law, and the semi-sum of the minimum and maximum custodial penalties must be at least one year. If several offences are alleged, one offence meeting that threshold may be enough for the others; where the request seeks enforcement of a sentence, at least one year of imprisonment must remain to be served when the request is made. A treaty may alter the default test, so the applicable treaty must be checked first.

The formal documents matter as much as the legal basis. Article 4 requires the request and accompanying documents to be translated into Spanish; documents transmitted through diplomatic channels do not require legalisation. For a person sought for trial, Article 13 requires a clear description of the facts (including date, place, circumstances and victim identification), the legal classification, an explanation of the requesting court’s jurisdiction and why the prosecution has not expired, an authenticated judicial detention decision and the reasons for suspecting the person’s involvement, the relevant criminal and procedural provisions, and known identifying details. Article 14 provides a different set of requirements when the request seeks enforcement of an existing sentence. A police alert or informal summary is not a substitute for the required formal material.

Argentina has bilateral extradition treaties with several states. The official Argentine Public Prosecutor’s Office maintains a treaty list, but a list entry or a law approving a treaty is not by itself proof that a newly approved treaty has entered into force. As of 26 October 2026, the Foreign Ministry’s official record marked the 2023 Argentina–Chile Extradition Treaty as not in force. It was approved domestically by Law No. 27,824, sanctioned on 27 August 2026 and published on 18 September 2026; Article 23 requires 30 days after the final diplomatic notification for entry into force. Law No. 27,807 approving the Argentina–Poland treaty was sanctioned on 20 May 2026 and published on 18 June 2026, but its current entry-into-force date was not verified in the official record consulted; do not assume it applies without checking the latest diplomatic notifications. The 1998 MERCOSUR Agreement on Extradition should likewise not be assumed to apply: the public MERCOSUR record does not show an entry-into-force record for that instrument.

Who handles the case: a federal judge, the prosecutor or the government?

The process is not decided by one national extradition court. Under Articles 21–22, 25 and 46 of Law No. 24,767, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Trade and Worship conducts the initial administrative review and, if the request is admissible, sends it into the judicial process through the Ministerio Público Fiscal (Argentina’s federal Public Prosecutor’s Office). Territorial competence is governed by Articles 111–113: a formal extradition request ordinarily goes to the federal criminal judge for the requested person’s place of residence who is on duty when the judicial phase begins. If residence is unknown or there are residences in different jurisdictions, the Foreign Ministry may choose among the corresponding federal judges or a federal judge in the Capital Federal, provided that judge is on duty. The judge who handled a formal provisional-arrest request also handles the extradition request; if provisional arrest occurred without prior judicial involvement, the on-duty federal criminal judge for the place of arrest is competent. The Public Prosecutor represents the interest in extradition; the requesting state may also participate through authorised representatives.

The judge decides whether the legal conditions for extradition are satisfied. The judicial proceeding is not a trial of the foreign criminal charge: Article 30 limits the debate to the statutory and treaty conditions that the judicial phase may examine and excludes a determination of the requested person’s guilt. A final judicial ruling declaring extradition admissible is subject to the ordinary appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 33. Only when the judgment becomes final does the court send the file to the Foreign Ministry for the Executive Branch’s limited decision under Article 36. At that stage, the Executive may refuse on the grounds in Articles 3 and 10 or decide the national’s option where Article 12’s last paragraph applies. If the court refuses extradition, the Ministry communicates that result to the requesting state.

The precise court must be identified under Articles 111–113: place of residence ordinarily governs a formal request, while an arrest made without prior judicial involvement generally points to the on-duty federal criminal judge for the place of arrest. Practical arrangements depend on where the person is arrested. For the Buenos Aires-specific layer, see the Buenos Aires extradition court guide; it does not replace this country-wide explanation.

What are the main stages and statutory time limits?

The table below gives the general statutory clocks. A treaty may provide a different period, and the clock may start from a particular notice or receipt rather than the date the person first heard about the case. Counsel should record the date, time, issuing authority and document for each event.

There is no single statutory deadline that resolves every case from arrest to transfer, and the 30-day provisional-arrest clock described below is not a general maximum for all extradition detention. The particular treaty and the procedural rules in force in the relevant federal jurisdiction must be checked before stating a total duration.

What happens if the person is arrested before the formal request arrives?

Articles 44–50 allow provisional arrest in defined situations, including a formal request, certain cross-border pursuit circumstances, and an INTERPOL notice issued at the request of a foreign court. A Red Notice is an international police alert, not a conviction and not by itself the final judicial decision to extradite. Argentine law nevertheless permits it to be a basis for provisional arrest under Article 44(c), subject to the statutory procedure.

When the formal request for provisional arrest is made, Article 45 requires identifying information, the date and place of the alleged conduct, its legal classification, the relevant penalty, the existence of a judicial arrest order and an undertaking to submit the formal extradition request. The request is sent promptly to the competent federal judge, with notice to the prosecutor and information to the Foreign Ministry. In border-pursuit cases under Article 47, if a diplomatic or consular official of the neighbouring state does not ask to maintain the arrest within two working days, the person must be released.

Under Article 49, the judge must hear a person under provisional arrest within 24 hours and appoint an official defender if the person has not retained counsel. The arrest must cease if the statutory conditions are not met at first sight or identity is wrong. Article 50 requires release, or cessation of imposed conditions, if 30 calendar days pass from communication of the arrest to the requesting state without the formal extradition request; the Foreign Ministry may grant a 10-calendar-day extension on a justified request. A later formal request may still permit a new arrest, so release under Article 50 is not necessarily a final ruling against extradition.

The 30-day period is a domestic default, not a universal clock. The official MPF 2024–2025 review records a 2025 Brazil matter in which the prosecutor treated Article VI(2) of the bilateral treaty as setting a 45-day period instead of the domestic 30 days. That was a treaty-specific prosecutorial opinion, not a universal 45-day rule; check the treaty governing the request before relying on release under Article 50.

Do not assume that ordinary criminal bail rules apply automatically. Article 26 generally excludes exemption from imprisonment and release on bail except where Law No. 24,767 expressly provides otherwise. A lawyer should identify the exact custody basis, the governing treaty's clock, whether the formal request has actually arrived and whether the court has complied with the required hearings.

How does the judicial hearing and extradition trial work?

At the first hearing, the judge informs the person of the arrest and the request, invites them to appoint a lawyer, records relevant statements and asks whether they wish to consent to extradition after consulting counsel. If the person does not speak Spanish, Article 27 requires an interpreter. Consent is a significant decision: Article 28 allows a person to consent freely and expressly at any stage, after which the judge may decide without a contested trial. Before consenting, the person should understand the applicable treaty, the charges covered, the destination and any consequences for later prosecution. Consent to extradition is not the same as waiving the separate protection of specialty after surrender.

If there is no consent and the case is not resolved on mistaken identity, a judicial trial is required. Article 30’s reference to the former “juicio correccional” procedure under the National Code of Criminal Procedure must now be read in light of the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure (Código Procesal Penal Federal, CPPF) and the Supreme Court's decision in Aliaga Reyes, José Luis s/ extradición, FSA 80/2023/CS1, dated 23 December 2025. The Court held that the extradition trial could not be omitted and that, in jurisdictions where the CPPF has replaced the former code, the CPPF ordinary procedure applies with adaptations for extradition. The mandatory hearings under Articles 27 and 49 of Law No. 24,767 remain in force. The implementation of the CPPF has been progressive, so counsel must verify which procedural system applies in the territory handling the case.

The official Public Prosecutor’s Office guidance published in April 2026 explains that, under the accusatory model, the same federal judge may conduct the statutory hearings, the adapted accusation-control stage and the extradition trial; review judges handle specified interlocutory challenges under the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure (CPPF), while the special ordinary appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 33 remains. In the CPPF model described in that guidance, the trial date is set after the opening order is sent to the judicial office, and the hearing is not to take place earlier than five days or later than thirty days after that office receives the file. This is not a universal overall case deadline; the applicable local implementation and any treaty rule must be confirmed.

The same official guide states that the ordinary appeal under Article 33 must be filed within five days, applying Articles 244 and 254 of the National Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure; the grounds are submitted during a further ten-day period. The appeal has suspensive effect. These are procedural deadlines: counsel must calculate them from formal notification under the rules applicable to the case. They are separate from the Executive Branch’s ten-working-day period under Article 36.

The extradition judge does not decide whether the foreign prosecution has proved guilt. The legal review may address identity, the required documents, dual criminality, the relevant penalty threshold and statutory or treaty conditions, but objections that simply ask the Argentine judge to retry the foreign evidence or decide innocence are generally outside the extradition trial's scope. In Mankevich Lifschitz, Saúl Eduardo s/ extradición, the Supreme Court (22 December 2015, Fallos 338:1551) confirmed extradition to Peru and explained that dual criminality concerns the substance of the conduct, not necessarily identical offence names in both legal systems. This principle must still be applied through the treaty governing the individual case and subsequent case law. The official 2024–2025 case-law compendium is a useful starting point for locating more recent judgments and their limits.

Does Argentine nationality or refugee status change the route?

For a person sought to stand trial, Article 12 allows an Argentine national to opt to be tried in Argentina if they held Argentine nationality when the conduct occurred and still hold it when the option is exercised. This is not an unconditional prohibition on extraditing nationals. If an applicable treaty allows extradition of nationals, the Executive Branch decides whether to accept the option at the stage described in Article 36. The option also requires the requesting state to agree to Argentina exercising jurisdiction and to send the material needed for a domestic prosecution. A request to enforce a foreign sentence should not be treated as identical to a request for trial under Article 12.

Article 20 contains a separate rule for a person who has refugee status where the extradition request comes from the country that gave rise to that protection: the Foreign Ministry returns the request without further processing and explains the obstacle. The facts supporting the status, the identity of the requesting state and any later change in circumstances should be documented immediately. Refugee status is not the same as simply having a pending asylum application, and the precise legal position requires individual review.

What do surrender, speciality, transit and multiple requests mean?

Once extradition is granted, Article 18's principle of specialty generally prevents the receiving state from prosecuting the person for earlier, different conduct without Argentina's prior authorisation. It also restricts onward extradition to a third state without Argentine authorisation. The statute recognises exceptions, including a freely and expressly made waiver before an Argentine diplomatic or consular authority with legal assistance, and specified circumstances involving 30 calendar days after the person can leave or a voluntary return. A person should not sign a waiver without advice on its full consequences.

If more than one state requests the same person, Articles 15–17 assign the preference decision to the government and list relevant factors such as treaty relations, request dates, where the offence occurred, access to evidence, the person's nationality and residence, and the relative prospects of granting each request. More than one request may be processed. If a person must travel through Argentina while being extradited by another state, Articles 57–61 provide a separate transit-authorisation route; for air travel, authorisation is required only if a stop in Argentina is scheduled. Transit is not the same as a new extradition request against a person found in Argentina.

What should an extradition lawyer do at each stage?

• Immediately after arrest: confirm identity and custody location, request the arrest basis and any INTERPOL or treaty paperwork, arrange an interpreter and ensure that the 24-hour hearing takes place.
• When the formal request arrives: compare the request with the applicable treaty and Articles 13–14, check translations and identity particulars, and map every relevant deadline to its trigger date.
• Before the extradition trial: organise the legally relevant documents, raise procedural defects in the proper hearing, and separate extradition issues from arguments about guilt that belong to the requesting state's criminal case.
• After the judicial ruling: track the Article 33 ordinary appeal to the Supreme Court and the suspensive effect of that appeal, then monitor the Article 36 executive stage and any treaty-specific conditions.
• Before transfer: check the final decision, the transfer clock, any postponement due to a domestic criminal case or health risk under Article 39, and the specialty conditions to be recorded in the diplomatic communication.

For a practical consultation, prepare the arrest or summons document, any notice or warrant, the request or court-file number, the person's passport and nationality records, prior judgments, documents relating to any refugee status, and a dated chronology. Keep originals safe and give counsel copies of any messages from police, prosecutors, courts, the Foreign Ministry or consular officials.

What is a realistic first step if the facts are still unclear?

Hypothetical example: a dual Argentine–foreign national is stopped at an airport after an INTERPOL notice, but officers cannot say whether a formal extradition request has arrived. Counsel should not treat the notice as proof that surrender is already authorised. The immediate lawful step is to identify the federal judge and prosecutor, obtain the custody record, insist on the applicable hearing and interpreter, and ask the Foreign Ministry channel whether the formal request has been transmitted. The treaty-specific provisional-arrest deadline then has to be calculated from the correct notification date.

The refusal grounds, evidentiary strategy, appeal deadlines and constitutional or international remedies require a separate, case-specific analysis; see how to challenge extradition from Argentina. This country guide does not replace that remedies page or local court guidance.

The site’s team coordinates cross-border defence with local counsel; for a confidential initial enquiry, use the contact request page.