Subject: The draft Extradition Bill (implementing EU Arrest
Warrant)
To: list A <philip@...>
From: Robert Henderson <Philip@...>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 16:56:15 +0100
Message-ID: <7GfUNCBfoyH9EwTG@...>

In article , James
Hammerton <james@...> writes
>This document can be found here:
>
> http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/extraditionbill/documents.htm
>
>It is a large bill with 169 clauses, the first 50 of which deal with
>the European Arrest Warrant. The bill creates 2 categories of
>territories with the rules for category 1 territories corresponding
to
>the EU Arrest Warrant.
>
>This will of course take some time to digest but I'll make a few
>points from my initial skimming of the section related to the EU
>Arrest Warrant:
>
>* you can be arrested under the warrant without the arresting officer
>having (a copy of) the warrant in his possession, though you are
>supposed to see the warrant as soon as is practicable after arrest if
>you request to do so, and failure to satisfy this condition will lead
>to you being discharged. (Clause 3)
>
>* the police are given the power to arrest someone without a warrant
>if they have reason to believe that an EU arrest warrant has been, or
>will be, issued against that person. A person so arrested must be
>presented before a judge within 48 hours, as must the EU arrest
>warrant. Again failure to produce the warrant will lead to the person
>being discharged. (Clause 4)
>
>* a person can consent to the extradition, however such consent
cannot
>be withdrawn. (Clause 6)
>
>* at the extradition hearing, extradition can be barred on any of the
>following grounds (clauses 9-15); the double jeopardy rule as it
>applies in British law, being under the age of legal responsibility,
>if the death penalty would be applied unless written assurance is
>given that it won't, "speciality" (I don't yet understand this) and
>where the person was extradited to the UK, if consent has not been
>given by the extraditing country for further extradition.
>Additionally, extradition only occurs for an "extradition offence".
>
>* the judge must decide whether the extradition would be compatible
>with the ECHR, and if he decides not the person must be discharged.
>(Clause 17)
>
>* there isa right of appeal against extradition that has to be
brought
>within 10 days of the extradition order and only if consent was not
>given for the extradition (Clause 21, 37 and 38)
>
>* post extradition, if the country that requested extradition
requests
>consent for the person to be prosecuted for another extradition
>offence the judge must grant such consent (unless double jeopardy,
>age, etc apply). I.e. you can be extradited for one extradition
>offence and then charged with another. (Clause 40)
>
>* Clause 41 allows EU countries to assume judge's consent in Clause
40
>unless the judge who order the extradition states that he has not
>given consent.
>
>* an extradition offence is one that occurs in a category 1
territory,
>is certified as part of the European Framework list, and is
punishable
>by a maximum of 12 months or more in prison or other detention in the
>category 1 territory making the request or in the UK. If the person
>has already been sentenced then the requirment is that the sentences
>is 4 months or more in prison or other detention. (Clause 47)
>
>So, if a category 1 territory requests your extradition:
>
>* you can be arrested without seeing the warrant (though you must see
>it by the time of the initial hearing if you request to do so),
>
>* the offence need not be an offence under UK law and also need not
>have the same punishment as under UK law,
>
>* there is no testing of the case against you prior to extradition
and
>the charges can be changed once you've been extradited.
>
>The offence needs to have been committed in the other territory
>concerned. But then the internet enables people to publish and
>distribute documents in other countries without leaving their homes
>and there is no testing of the evidence that you committed the
offence
>by the British courts and therefore no testing even of whether you
>were in the relevant country (or published something in that country)
>at the time when the offence took place.
>
>In fact ISTM the defendant (and his lawyers) won't get to see what
>evidence is against him until he's been extradited (and that assumes
>the country concerned will show it to him before the trial).
>
>Now consider -- the "extradition offences" are determined not by this
>legislation but by an EU document which can be revised and adopted
>without our MPs touching it, the EU is in the process of enlargement
>which will admit many other countries with varying standards of
>justice and offences which may not exist or may be punished
>differently under UK laws.
>
>This legislation will leave British people at risk of being forcibly
>moved to another country to face trial for offences that might not
>even exist in the UK, without a shred of evidence that they committed
>the offence ever being presented in a British court.
>
>James

--
Robert Henderson
philip@...
Blair Scandal web site at http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal web site at http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk
-----End of original message from Robert Henderson-----

--
Peter Watson


If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a
questionnaire
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/eurorealist