Practice Groups
EXTRADITION APPEAL HEARINGS
Members of Chambers are instructed to represent both the requested persons and judicial authorities in extradition appeal cases.
If either the requested person or the requested state to the extradition proceedings is unhappy with the judge’s decision at the extradition hearing, they may ask the High Court for leave (permission) to appeal.
An application for permission to appeal must be made within 7 days of the relevant decision being made (i.e. an order for extradition or an order discharging the extradition case against the requested person). If the High Court grants permission, it will go on to consider the appeal.
If the High Court allows an appeal brought by the requested person, it will quash the order for extradition and order the person’s discharge. If the High Court allows an appeal brought by the requesting state, it will quash the order discharging the person and will send the case back to the magistrates’ or sheriff’s court for a new decision to be taken.
High Court upholds decision to refuse to extradite to Turkey on multiple grounds
Joel Bennathan KC (now the Honourable Mr Justice Bennathan ) acted for the successful requested person, leading Claire Stevenson, instructed by Ali Has of Morgan Has Solicitors in the following important case;
On 21 June 2021 Lord Justice Dingemans and Mr Justice Johnson handed down a judgment dismissing Turkey’s appeal against District Judge Zani’s refusal to extradite a Kurdish activist. The District Judge had refused the request on the basis there would be no fair trial, the requested person would be prejudiced because of his beliefs, and he would be likely to suffer cruel and inhuman treatment because of Turkey’s policy of prolonged solitary confinement for persons they regard as “terrorists”. The High Court upheld all of DJ Zani’s decisions in an appeal that considered the practical application of the Aranyosiprinciple [when a DJ needs to adjourn and seek further assurances] and whether a requested person who has successfully resisted extradition can cross appeal.
Access the judgment in this case here.
Nita v Romania [2024] EWHC 408 (Admin) – Claire Stevenson, instructed by the CPS Extradition Unit to provide written submissions in response to an application by the requested person to renew permission to appeal. Permission to appeal was refused.
Gurskis v Latvian Judicial Authority [2022] EWHC 1305 (Admin) - Claire Stevenson represented the Judicial Authority at a High Court appeal by the requested person where ‘Brexit uncertainty’ was a key issue.
The Appellant submitted that extradition would amount to a disproportionate interference with Article 8 on the basis that there was ‘uncertainty surrounding the residence rights of EU citizens in the UK after Brexit’. In response, it was argued that at the lower court, the Appellant did not raise that he would be unable to re-enter the UK as a result of the length of sentence he was to serve. It was only argued that there was ‘Brexit uncertainty’ (Antochi v Germany [2020] EWHC 3092 (Admin));
The District Judge (“DJ”) properly considered the issue of Brexit uncertainty weighing in the Appellant’s favour; and Pink v Poland [2021] EWHC 1238 (Admin).
The appeal was dismissed.
