This question was motivated by Julian Assange's famous case, but it is a more general question.
As it is known, he currently has a conviction of 50 weeks prison term for bail jumping. Thus, England wants him to serve it in a prison (jail?).
From the other side, another country - this time, the USA - wants him, without a conviction (in the USA), but because also they want to punish him.
Thus, we have a conflict of interest:
- The English criminal system wants him to serve his punishment. They are probably tuned to not allow him to go to anywhere, until he served his prison term.
- Also the criminal system of another country wants him. The U.K. is bound by international agreements to give him to them.
The logical solution would be to first make him to serve his punishment in the U.K., and then extradict him to the USA. It seems a likely outcome in JA's case, but not always.
For example, in the case of a famous terrorist or war criminal, it would be surreal to delay his criminal procedure, only because he committed also some traffic offense in the U.K.
Which interest will be stronger? How is it being decided?