What is the current state of the law on the use of private-retained electronic monitoring services in the context of an extradition hearing?

On occasion, and in the extradition context, judges have been presented with plans that involve privately-retained, electronic monitoring firms. It has been recognized that, while evolving technology has made electronic monitoring more efficacious, it is not infallible. Electronic monitoring cannot prevent someone from absconding; it merely helps notify the authorities when the person has left: United States of America v. Pannell, supra, paras. 40 and 42 and United States of America v. Khadr, supra, at pp. 150-151.