Most, if not all, businesses will at some point find themselves presented with a grievance by an employee. It is […]
As explained in the first part of this series, extradition is the formal process where one country asks another to return a person in order to stand trial or to serve a sentence. Because extradition strikes at the heart of citizenship and Statehood, in that it denies a person the cherished right of the protection of the country in which they enjoy citizenship, the decision to grant extradition is never taken lightly by the Courts or Secretary of State.
There are several circumstances in which legislation bars the Courts in England and Wales from granting extradition.
The statutory bars to extradition include the following;
One of the most common defences to extradition is that by returning a person to the requesting State, the UK would be breaching that person’s human rights. The leading case for breaches of art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (the right to family and private life) is R (on the application of HH) v Westminster City Magistrates' Court [2012] UKSC 25. The case concerned conjoined appeals. In the first case, the Appellant mother (F) appealed against a decision to extradite her to Poland for dishonesty offences on the grounds that doing so would breach art. 8 given she had five children, two of whom were aged eight and three. The second case involved a mother and father convicted of drug crimes, who had fled Italy in breach of bail conditions. They had three young children.
The Supreme Court held:
“If we were only concerned with the three oldest children, things would be different. They would be very unhappy at the loss of their mother and might suffer some educational setbacks as a result, but they would be able to get on with their lives with the help of their father, who is determined to keep the family together. They would be able to recall their mother while she was away, even if they were only able to see her rarely, and they would be able to look forward to her coming back. As Dr Armstrong points out, the consequences for the two youngest would be far more severe. E, in particular, would be deprived of her primary attachment figure while she is still under the age of four. Such losses can have lasting effects upon a child's development and it does not appear that her father would have the psychological resources to fill the gap or that help would be available from the social or other services to support the family. The eight-year-old would also suffer from the loss of her mother, might well blame herself for it, and would find it hard to look forward to her return. It is not an abuse of language to describe the effects upon these two children as exceptionally severe”. [para 44].
Extradition law is highly unsettled due to the political and media attention the subject to extradition often receives. Therefore, it is imperative to have a highly experienced legal team who have a considerable understanding of domestic and international criminal law to advise and represent you.
Take a look at Part One of this series here: A Guide To UK Extradition Law - Part 1