- 19 which the process is founded does not constitute an offense in either the requesting State or Peru, and if neither legislation establishes a criminal sanction of any kind, equal to, or in excess of, one year’s imprisonment,” or when “[t]he offense for which extradition is requested is punishable by the death penalty in the requesting State and the latter has not provided assurances that this will not be applicable.”43 59. In addition, regarding the procedure to be followed, Peruvian procedural law establishes that, once the person whose extradition has been requested has been detained, a preliminary investigation judge will take a statement. In this statement, the person sought “may state whatever he considers appropriate.” Subsequently, within no more than 15 days, a public hearing must be convened where evidence and arguments are presented in favor of or against extradition, and the individual sought may again make a statement “if he finds this appropriate.” Following this hearing, the file is referred to the consideration of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, which must issue the advisory decision (supra para. 57). When it has received the case file, and before forwarded it to the parties, the Criminal Chamber will convene an extradition hearing, following which it issues the corresponding advisory decision within five days at the most. Three days after this decision has been notified to the parties, the Criminal Chamber must forward it to the Ministry of Justice and, as of this moment, the second stage of the procedure commences before the Executive Branch.44 The rules relating to the extradition process in Peru are described in greater detail in the corresponding chapters (infra paras. 137, 138 and 240 to 242). C. The extradition process in the case of Wong Ho Wing 60. Since 2001, Wong Ho Wing has been “an international fugitive, [owing to an INTERPOL Red Notice,] wanted by the judicial authorities of Hong Kong, China, for the offense of smuggling that occurred between [August 1996 and May 1998].”45 Early on October 27, 2008, Wong Ho Wing was arrested in the “Jorge Chávez International Airport” that serves Lima, when he was entering Peru from the United States of America. That same day, the police brought him before the Permanent Criminal Court of El Callao.46 C.1) First stage of the process (from the arrest of Wong Ho Wing until the second advisory decision) 61. On October 28, Wong Ho Wing gave a preliminary statement in the presence of his lawyer and asked the Peruvian authorities to accord him “special treatment based on the defense of [his] human rights, [because if he was] returned [to his] country for the offenses that [he was] accused of, [he] could be executed or the death penalty would be imposed” on him. Consequently, he “asked to be tried in […] Peru.”47 62. On November 14, 2008, the Seventh Criminal Court of El Callao received the request to extradite Wong Ho Wing from the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter also “China�� or “the 43 Code of Criminal Procedure, promulgated by Legislative Decree No. 957 of July 29, 2004, articles 516 and 517. Available at: http://www.leyes.congreso.gob.pe/Documentos/Decretoslegislativos/00957.pdf, cited in the Commission’s Merits Report, folio 24. 44 Cf. Code of Criminal Procedure, promulgated by Legislative Decree No. 957 of July 29, 2004, article 521. Available at: http://www.leyes.congreso.gob.pe/Documentos/Decretoslegislativos/00957.pdf, cited in the Commission’s Merits Report, folio 24. 45 Note of the Peruvian National Police of October 27, 2008 (evidence file, folio 6). Cf. INTERPOL Red Notice entitled “Wanted for Prosecution” (evidence file, folio 8), and arrest warrant dated April 16, 2001 (evidence file, folio 6391). 46 47 Cf. Note of the Peruvian National Police of October 27, 2008 (evidence file, folio 6). Preliminary statement made by Wong Ho Wing on October 28, 2008, before the Special Criminal Court of El Callao (evidence file, folio 15).