Extradition Act 2003
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Extradition Act 2003 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom. It came into force on 1 January 2004 and all import and export extradition requests submitted or received from this date are covered by the Act. It concerns itself with extradition to and from the UK in respect of all territories and in particular implements into UK law the US-UK Extradition Treaty 2003.
Contents |
[edit] Controversy
Amongst other provisions Part 2 of the Act: Extradition to category 2 territories (non-European Arrest warrant territories) has caused some controversy.
The issue arises at the Extradition Hearing stage where amongst other considerations the District Judge must: Be satisfied that the request contains admissible evidence of the offence sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the person. This requirement does not apply in respect of extradition requests from the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The controversy stems from the absence of any reciprocal arrangement in respect of the United States. Therefore at the present time there is no requirement on the U.S. to provide prima facie evidence when requesting the extradition of UK residents, both foreign nationals and UK citizens, but as provided by the UK Act it maintains the requirement for the UK to provide such evidence to the U.S. in the reverse situation. This was the subject of concern prior to the passing of the legislation, and a cause of controversy when it has been applied.
There is also concern at the loss of entitlement of UK citizens to legal aid for maintaining an adequate defence to criminal charges once they are extradited to U.S. jurisdiction where costs are largely met by the defendant's private means. This has been a cause of controversy in cases where it has been perceived that the UK has suitable legislation for prosecuting offences domestically.
[edit] Developments
The controversy surrounding the United States' lack of reciprocity noted above is a result of the failure of the U.S. to ratify the US-UK Extradition Treaty 2003 into U.S. law. Baroness Scotland, Minister of State for the Criminal Justice System at the Home Office, travelled to the U.S. on Thursday 13 July 2006 to address this issue. For this act of personal diplomacy to be successful the Treaty would have needed to pass with a two-thirds majority in the United States Senate.
This move was prompted by political criticism of the Act within the UK and an Opposition proposal to amend the Act in the House of Lords. It also coincided with public disquiet at the case of the so-called NatWest Three who were extradited on the same date.[1]
On 30 September 2006 the US Senate unanimously ratified the treaty.[2]
British Home Secretary John Reid said he was "delighted" senators had backed the treaty, Agence France-Presse reported.
"The treaty is an important measure in our fight against serious international crime," Reid said in a statement, AFP reported. The treaty, first sent to the Senate for approval in April 2004, lowers the level of proof the U.S. must show to win extradition of a suspect. It also permits temporary surrender of fugitives for trial who are already serving a prison sentence in the other country.
Ratification had been slowed by complaints from some Irish-American groups that the treaty would create new legal jeopardy for PIRA terrorists who fled to the USA in the 1980s [3] and their American supporters.
[edit] Cases where the Act has been applied
[edit] External links
- Official text of the statute as amended and in force today within the United Kingdom, from the UK Statute Law Database
- opsi.gov.uk - the text of the act from the Office of Public Sector Information
- cps.gov.uk - the Crown Prosecution Service guidelines on extradition
- statewatch.org - statewatch page on the Act
- theyworkforyou.com - Hansard records of Parliamentary debate relating to the Act
