It’s common practice to seek extradition of crims who are in a different jurisdiction.
IN the USA, if a crime is committed in California and the perp is caught in Texas, they would be taken back to CAlifornia for trial.
This is not any different. These people are suspected of crimes against Chinese citizens in China. And they have been traced to Kenya. Where the local jurisdiction has also decided there is merit to Chinese claims that these people have engaged in criminal activity. Thusly the Kenyan govt has agreed to their relocation to China for trial.
All very good in the war against crime. A border or different jurisdiction should not be safe harbor for criminals.
Its not about kidnapping the Pope or Dalai Lama.
The US was more brazen to go after Bin Laden in a jurisdiction unfriendly to the USA and carry out "justice " in Uncle Sam’s eye. Of course there is/was much evidence of Bin Laden’s guilt in the twin towers destruction. We in the western world are not condemning the USA for this action.
But again this is about simple suspected crims thinking they are “safe” in another jurisdiction.
They were not and should not be “safe” from prosecution of criminal offenses.
They were suspected of criminal activity and the Kenyan govt agreed that there is merit to the charges and released them to be brought to China for trial. All good and normal.
NOt different then the USA asking for extradition of people who have commited crimes if they are in a foreign land/jurisdiction.
Taiwan is asking for what’s his name (the guy who possibly knocked the scoot driver and killed him and fled to the UK with a friends passport) back right? Is this different really to the case at hand? Not really.
The Scots have decided that claim has merit and has in fact locked up said individual. And are considering extradition.
Should Taiwan not ask for him to be brought back because he is no longer on the rock?
Should China stand back and let criminals hide in Kenya while they extort money from Chinese citizens? Because people would think this sets a “bad” precedent? IF the USA does it does it also set a "bad " precedent? Oh I forget, China is the de facto “bad guy” and therefore anything and everything it does is suspect? Right.