Post Legislative Assessment of the Extradition Act 2003 – submission by the Home Office (EXL0001)
Introduction
1. Extradition is the formal procedure for requesting the surrender of a person from one territory to another for the following purposes:
2. An incoming extradition request is made by another territory to the UK, for the extradition of a person from the UK.
3. An outgoing extradition request is made by the UK to another territory, for the extradition of a person to the UK.
4. The relevant primary legislation is the Extradition Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act”)[1]. This memorandum has been prepared by the Home Office for submission in order to assist the reader in understanding the provisions and operation of the 2003 Act.
5. The 2003 Act is divided into five Parts. These are dealt with further in this memorandum. Briefly, Parts 1 and 2 set out the framework for processing incoming extradition requests from other states. Part 3 makes provision regarding outgoing extradition requests. Part 4 makes provision regarding powers of arrest, search and seizure. Finally, Part 5 contains miscellaneous provisions.
6. Extradition is “reserved” vis-à-vis Scotland and “excepted” vis-à-vis Northern Ireland. That said, Scottish Ministers do exercise some of the functions which, in the rest of the UK, are exercised by the Secretary of State.
7. (Extradition statistics are provided in the Annex to this paper).
8. In March 2000, the then Home Secretary, announced that a review of UK extradition legislation was to be carried out. In March 2001, a review of the law on extradition was published by the Home Office. This review formed part of the background to the enactment of the 2003 Act.
9. The 2003 Act received Royal Assent on 20 November 2003, most of its provisions coming into force on 1 January 2004. The 2003 Act reformed the law on extradition and repealed the previous legislation, the Extradition Act 1989. The 2003 Act provides a comprehensive statutory framework for the extradition of wanted persons between the UK and other territories.
10. The objectives of the 2003 Act were to provide a quick and effective framework for extradition, subject to appropriate safeguards. The main features of the 2003 Act are:
11. To date, there have been four main Acts which have amended the 2003 Act. These are outlined below.
12. The Police and Justice Act 2006 received Royal Assent on 8 November 2006. Sections 42 and 43 and Schedule 13 made a number of amendments to extradition legislation (principally the 2003 Act), including:
13. The Policing and Crime Act 2009 received Royal Assent on 12 November 2009. Part 6 made a number of amendments to the 2003 Act, including:
Crime & Courts Act 2013
14. The Crime and Courts Act 2013 received Royal Assent on 25 April 2013. Section 50 and Schedule 20 made three changes to the 2003 Act:
15. The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime & Policing Act 2014 received Royal Assent on 13 March 2014. Part 12 makes various amendments to the 2003 Act and other legislation relating to extradition. These are set out in detail below in the section on Provisions to Improve the General Process of Extradition. They include:
16. As of July 2014, these provisions, have not yet been commenced.Previous Reviews
17. The 2003 Act has not been subject to formal post-legislative scrutiny in the past. It has, however, been the subject of a number of reviews (both independent and parliamentary) since coming into force. These are outlined below.
18. On 20 May 2010 the coalition government gave a commitment to review the UK’s extradition processes[5]. As a consequence, the Home Secretary announced, on 8 September 2010, that a review would look in detail at the following five key areas of extradition arrangements:
19. Sir Scott Baker QC led the review. He was joined by two independent lawyers with expertise in extradition matters; David Perry QC and Anand Doobay, who has particular experience in defending individuals subject to extradition requests.
20. The panel reported back to the government on 30 September 2011[6].
21. The key findings from the Baker review were:
22. On 16 October 2012 the Home Secretary announced the government’s response to the Baker review. The Home Secretary’s oral ministerial statement to the House of Commons and the government’s response to Sir Scott Baker’s recommendations are available in Command Paper 8458[7]. In summary:
23. In December 2010 the JCHR announced an inquiry into the human rights implications of UK extradition policy.
24. The JCHR inquiry focussed on whether the UK’s bilateral extradition treaties, along with the EAW system and the European Investigation Order (EIO), complied with the UK’s human rights obligations. The inquiry sought to address a number of issues, including:
25. The JCHR inquiry ran in parallel with the Baker review, but had no formal connection to it.
26. On 22 June 2011, the JCHR published its report[8]. Its key findings were:
27. On 16 October 2012 the Home Secretary announced the government’s response to the JCHR inquiry. The Home Secretary’s oral ministerial statement to the House and the government’s response to the JCHR inquiry recommendations are available in Command Paper 8464[9]. In summary:
Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) opt-out decision to work with the EC, and with other Member States, to reform the EAW so that it provides the protections that citizens demand;
The Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) re view on extradition arrangements between the UK–USA
28. One of the first commitments made by the coalition government was to review the operation of the 2003 Act and the UK - USA Extradition Treaty. This commitment was made in the context of widespread political concern about the operation of the UK's extradition arrangements with the USA.
29. On 30 March 2012, the HASC published its report into the extradition arrangements between the UK and USA[10].
30. The key findings from the HASC review were:
31. On 16 October 2012 the Home Secretary announced the government’s response to the HASC review. The Home Secretary’s oral ministerial statement to the House and the government’s response to the HASC review recommendations are available in Command Paper 8465[11]. In summary:
32. All provisions in the 2003 Act were implemented (or commenced) by way of a UK Statutory Instrument issued via Parliament (further details are provided in the Annex to this paper). These included updates and amendments to provisions, such as the list of extraditable offences. They also included the designation of territories under category 1 or 2, as appropriate, or the designation of relevant authorities with responsibility in the UK, such as when the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) was replaced by the National Crime Agency (NCA). They also covered the commencement of police powers.
33. A selection of these are given below;
34. This chapter sets out the operation of the provisions of the 2003 Act. It takes account of amendments made to the 2003 Act by the Police and Justice Act 2006; the Policing and Crime Act 2009; and the Crime and Courts Act 2013.
35. The amendments introduced in the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime & Policing Act 2014, had not yet commenced, at the time of writing this paper.
36. This is not a step-by-step guide to the extradition process and should be read in conjunction with the procedures set out in the 2003 Act.
37. Part 1 of the 2003 Act was enacted to transpose much of European Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the EAW and the surrender procedures between Member States (2002/584/JHA).
38. Part 1 deals with cases where the UK receives an EAW from a State which has been designated for the purposes of the Part under section 1 (‘category 1 territories’). All other Member States of the EU, plus Gibraltar, are currently designated under section 1[13].
39. Section 2 applies where the designated authority receives a Part 1 warrant (i.e. an EAW) in respect of a person. The NCA is the designated authority except in Scotland where it is the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service[14].
40. The NCA checks whether the EAW contains the necessary statement and information (set out in section 2). If it does, the NCA may issue a certificate provided it believes that the authority which issued the EAW has the function of issuing warrants. If a certificate is issued, the warrant may be executed by a constable or customs officers in any part of the UK (section 3).
41. Section 4 applies where a person is arrested under section 3. It says, inter alia, that the person must be brought as soon as practicable before the appropriate judge (which is defined in section 67).
42. Sections 5 and 6 deal with provisional arrest (an emergency procedure, used in particularly urgent cases).
43. Sections 7 and 8 deal with the initial hearing. At the initial hearing the judge must decide whether the person brought before him/her is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued. The judge must also, amongst other things, fix a date for the extradition hearing to begin (which must normally be within 21 days of arrest) and remand the person in custody or on bail.
44. Sections 9 to 25 deal with the extradition hearing. At the extradition hearing (which may be merged with the initial hearing in straightforward cases) the judge must decide a number of issues, including:
45. The judge must discharge the person if s/he decides that there is no ‘extradition offence’, that extradition is barred or that extradition would not be compatible with the person’s human rights.
46. The bars (dealt with in sections 11 to 19F) are:
47. If there are no statutory grounds to refuse the request, an order must be made for the person's surrender.
48. Sections 22 to 25 make provision regarding various matters which may arise before the end of the extradition hearing.
49. Sections 26 to 34 deal with appeals. The 2003 Act gives the wanted person (in cases where the judge orders extradition) and the requesting State (in cases where the judge order’s the person’s discharge) a right of appeal against the decision of the judge. Appeals are to the High Court in the first instance and timeframes are set out in the 2003 Act. There is an onward right of appeal to the Supreme Court, with leave.
50. Sections 35 and 36 set out the time limit for surrendering a person (in cases where extradition is to take place). In short, a person must be extradited before the end of the required period, which is 10 days starting with:
51. The remainder of Part 1 deals with a number of miscellaneous issues, including competing EAWs, withdrawal of the EAW and post-extradition matters.
52. Part 2 of the 2003 Act, deals with incoming extradition requests from territories which have been designated under section 69 (‘category 2 territories’). These are territories outside the EU with which the UK has extradition relations. At present there are almost 100 territories designated as category 2 territories (further details are provided in the Annex to this paper).
53. Upon receipt of a valid extradition request from a category 2 territory the Secretary of State must (subject to certain limited exceptions) issue a certificate. The provisions governing when an extradition request is valid and certification are set out in section 70.
54. In cases where a certificate is issued, the request and certificate are sent to the appropriate judge.
55. On receipt of the papers, the judge must decide whether or not to issue an arrest warrant for the wanted person. Section 71 deals with this, and sets out that the judge may issue a warrant if s/he has reasonable grounds for believing that the offence is an ‘extraditable offence’ (defined in sections 137 and 138) and that there is certain specified evidence or where a territory is designated by order under Part 2 specified information[15].
56. Section 72 applies if a person is arrested under a section 71 arrest warrant. It states, inter alia, that the person must be brought as soon as practicable before the appropriate judge who must either remand the person in custody or on bail.
57. Sections 73 and 74 deal with provisional arrest requests, the issue of provisional arrest warrants and the arrest of persons further to such warrants.
58. Sections 75 to 92 cover the extradition hearing, which must normally begin within two months of the person first being brought before the judge.
59. At the extradition hearing the judge must decide a number of issues:
60. The bars are set out in section 79, and explained fully in the succeeding sections. They include :
61. If any of the bars apply, the person must be discharged. Otherwise, the judge must proceed under section 84 (in cases where the person is wanted for the purposes of prosecution) or section 85 (in cases where the person has been convicted).
62. In all cases, the judge must also decide whether the person's extradition would be compatible with his/her human rights. Section 87 deals with this. The judge must order the person's discharge if extradition would not be compatible with the person’s ECHR rights.
63. If the judge decides that extradition is not prohibited, s/he must send the case to the Secretary of State for a decision on whether to order extradition.
64. Sections 93 to 102 cover the Secretary of State’s consideration of cases. The Secretary of State must decide whether she is prohibited from ordering the person’s extradition under any of sections 94, 95, 96 or 96A[16]. These deal with, respectively:
65. If the Secretary of State decides that extradition is prohibited on any of these grounds, then she must order the person’s discharge. Otherwise, she must order extradition.
66. Section 50 of, and Part 2 of Schedule 20 to, the Crown and Courts Act
2013 amended sections 70, 108 and 117 of the 2003 Act to the effect that (i) the Secretary of State may not consider at any time after the issue of certificate under section 70 whether extradition would be compatible with a person’s Convention rights, and (ii) if a person wishes to raise such issues after the end of the normal statutory process, s/he must do so by way of an out-of-time appeal to the courts.
67. Sections 103 to 116 govern appeals. If extradition is ordered, the person has the right of appeal to the High Court against the decisions of the judge (section 103) and the Secretary of State (section 108). If the person is discharged by the judge or the Secretary of State, the requesting territory has the right of appeal to the High Court (sections
105 and 110).
68. An appeal lies to the Supreme Court from a decision of the High Court under section 103, 105, 108 or 110.
69. Sections 117 and 118 set out the time scales for surrendering a person.
70. The remainder of Part 2 of the 2003 Act covers areas such as the withdrawal of the extradition request, competing extradition requests, consent to extradition and post-extradition matters.
71. Part 3 of the 2003 Act deals with extradition to the UK (i.e. cases where the UK makes the request of another territory).
72. Sections 142 to 149 deal with extradition from category 1 territories (i.e.
EAW cases)[17].
73. Section 142 as amended by the Police and Justice Act 2006 sets out the conditions for the issue, by the appropriate judge, of a Part 3 warrant (i.e. an EAW). In short, in cases where the person is wanted for the purposes of prosecution, there must be reasonable grounds for believing that the person has committed an ‘extradition offence’ and that a domestic warrant has been issued. In cases where the person has already been convicted, there must be reasonable grounds for believing that the person is unlawfully at large following conviction for an ‘extradition offence’ and that either a domestic warrant has been issued or the person could be arrested without a warrant. ‘Extradition offence’ is defined in section 148 and ‘appropriate judge’ in section
149.
74. The remainder of Part 3 makes provision for cases of extradition to the UK from category 2 territories (section 150) and generally (sections 151A to 155A)[18]. Requests to category 2 territories are made under the Royal Prerogative.
75. Part 4 of the 2003 Act deals with police powers, making provision regarding, among other things, search and seizure warrants, production orders, powers of search and seizure without warrant and the treatment of persons following arrest under the Act.
76. Most of this Part does not extend to Scotland reflecting the difference in policing powers across the UK.
77. Section 173 requires the Secretary of State to issue Codes of Practice in connection with the exercise of powers conferred by Part 4 of the 2003 Act, the retention, use and return of anything seized or produced under the Part and the like.
78. A Code of Practice issued under this section is admissible in evidence in an extradition case and must be taken into account by a judge or court in determining any question to which it appears to the judge or court to be relevant.
79. Finally, Part 5 of the 2003 Act covers a number of miscellaneous and general matters, including extradition to and from the British Overseas Territories, the conduct of extradition proceedings and special extradition arrangements.
80. Section 194 allows the Secretary of State to certify that arrangements have been made between the UK and another territory for the extradition of a person to that territory and that territory is not a category 1 or category 2 territory. If a certificate is issued, the 2003 Act applies in respect of the person’s extradition as if the territory were a category 2 territory (with modifications). This allows for extradition in cases where the UK does not have formal extradition arrangements with the territory in question.
81. The 2003 Act has been amended on four occasions since 2004. The main changes are set out below
82. Section 42 of the Police and Justice Act 2006 introduced Schedule 13 which made amendments to the 2003 Act. The references to paragraphs below relate to that schedule.
Requests for extradition of persons unlawfully at large.
83. Paragraphs 1 and 2 amended the wording in the 2003 Act relating to extradition requests for persons who were unlawfully at large in relation to the offence for which they had been requested. They amended various sections of the 2003 Act to refer instead to a person who “has been convicted.” The convicted person can only be sought if wanted for the purpose of sentencing or to carry out a sentence of imprisonment
Restriction on extradition following transfer from ICC.
84. Paragraph 3 amended Parts 1 and 2 of the 2003 Act so that in cases where a requested person had previously been transferred to the UK by the ICC, extradition was barred without the consent of the Presidency of the ICC.
Restriction on extradition in cases where trial in United Kingdom more appropriate.
85. Paragraphs 4 and 5 introduced a ground for refusal of extradition where an accused person was requested for conduct, a significant part of which occurred in the UK, and it would not have been in the interests of justice for that person to be tried in the requesting territory. These provisions were never commenced
Remand of persons serving sentence in United Kingdom.
86. Section 131 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 made provision for a person who was serving a domestic sentence, and who was simultaneously on remand awaiting trial for another domestic offence, to be remanded every 28 days in respect of the unconvicted offence.
87. Section 131 also applied to persons serving a domestic sentence who was simultaneously the subject of an extradition request. Paragraph 7, via amendments to sections 23 and 89 of the 2003 Act, amended the references to 28 days in section 131 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 to have effect as if they were a reference to 6 months.
Remands in connection with appeal proceedings.
88. Paragraph 8 made explicit provision for remands in appeal proceedings. The paragraph amended various provisions in Part 1 and Part 2 of the 2003 Act which provided for appeal routes to the High Court and Supreme Court.
Time for extradition.
89. Paragraph 9 extended the deadline by which the subject of an executed Part 1 warrant must be removed if the person decided not to appeal. Upon a decision of a judge to order extradition the person had seven days in which to lodge an appeal.
Extradition of person serving sentence in United Kingdom.
90. Paragraphs 10 to 14 made provision for a person who is on licence in the UK following conviction for an offence to be extradited while on licence. While the 2003 Act made provision for a serving prisoner to be temporarily surrendered to the requesting jurisdiction, it did not make equivalent provision for someone who had completed the custodial part of the sentence and was out on licence.
91. The amendments also cover arrangements for both the surrender of the person to the requesting jurisdiction and for his return to the UK to complete his license period after his trial in the other state.
92. The amendments do not apply where someone has been given a suspended sentence or conditional discharge.
“The appropriate judge ”
93. Paragraphs 15 and 16 provide that a case may be heard by a different judge at different times.
Extradition to category 2 territories: requests and certificates.
94. Paragraph 17 amend section 70(1) and (2) of the 2003 Act to provide Ministers with a discretion whether to certify an extradition request for a person who:
95. The paragraph also amends section 70(1) to provide for a Part 2 request to be certified whether or not the person is in the UK on the day of certification.
96. In addition, it removes the reference at section 70(9) to the Order in Council which designated the requesting state. This is because the orders designating states for extradition purposes are made by Order of the Secretary of State not by Order in Council. It also removes the requirement at section 70(9) for the relevant order to accompany each certified request when it is sent to the court. The amendment made by sub-paragraph (4) requires Ministers instead to identify the relevant order when sending the request to the court.
Time for representations and consideration of case under Part 2.
97. Paragraph 18 reduces the time permitted for the requested person to make representations to 4 weeks. (This has the consequence of equalising the time for the making of representations with the time within which the Secretary of State is required to consider them). It also provides that if the person has consented to his extradition Ministers are not required to wait until the end of the permitted period (i.e. 4 weeks) to order extradition.
Applications for discharge or for extension of time limit.
98. Paragraph 19 amends section 99 of the 2003 Act to provide for applications in England and Wales to be made to the Magistrates’ Court instead of the High Court in the following cases: where the person is applying for discharge (because Ministers have not ordered extradition within the permitted period), and where Ministers are applying for an extension of time in which to consider the case (because it raises issues that are too complex to be dealt with in the permitted period).
Scotland: references to Secretary of State.
99. Paragraph 20 corrects a flaw in the 2003 Act which attributed to Scottish Ministers a function that should properly be attributed to the Secretary of State. Section 141 is thereby amended, with the effect that, in Scottish cases, references to section 70(2)(b) (as amended) and section 93(4)(c) are references to the Secretary of State and not to Scottish Ministers.
Issue of Part 3 warrant: persons unlawfully at large who may be arrested without domestic warrant.
100. Paragraph 21 amends section 142 of the 2003 Act to provide for additional grounds upon which a Part 3 warrant (a UK European Arrest Warrant for transmission to another Category 1 territory) may be issued, where the wanted person is unlawfully at large.
Issue of Part 3 warrant: domestic warrant issued at common law by judge in Northern Ireland.
101. Paragraph 22 amends section 142(8) of the 2003 Act by adding common law warrants issued by a crown court judge in Northern Ireland to the list of domestic warrants.
Dealing with person for pre-extradition offences following extradition to
UK.
102. Paragraph 23 amends section 146(3)(c) of the 2003 Act to provide the basis upon which the UK authorities can issue a request for pre-extradition offences to be dealt with following a wanted person’s return to the UK. The amendment makes provision for such a request to be issued by a judge, analogous to the issue of the original Part 3 warrant.
Extradition requests to territories not applying European framework decision to old cases.
103. Paragraph 24 makes provision for the issue of extradition requests (as opposed to Part 3 warrants) to certain category 1 territories for certain old offences. A small number of territories have availed themselves of the provisions of Article 32 of the Framework Decision on the EAW, which states that where a person is wanted for offences committed before 7 August 2002 an extradition request rather than a EAW may be issued for their extradition.
Extradition of serving prisoners
104. Paragraph 25 clarifies that a serving prisoner may be removed from custody in the UK if he is extradited to another country.
Authentication of receivable documents
105. Paragraph 26 amends to section 202(4) of the 2003 Act to restore the receivability of documents in court which have been authenticated by an officer, in addition to documents authenticated by a judicial authority of the requesting state.
Powers of High Court in relation to bail decisions by magistrates’ courts
106. Paragraph 27 gives a requested person refused bail by a magistrates’ court an avenue of appeal.
107. Paragraph 28 changes the venue for appeals in bail proceedings from the crown court, which has no other involvement in extradition proceedings, to the High Court, which hears all other appeals in extradition proceedings.
108. Paragraphs 29 and 30 provide a prosecution right of appeal against the grant of bail in extradition proceedings in Northern Ireland where bail has been granted either by a Magistrates' Court or by a County Court Judge
Credit against sentence for periods of remand in custody of persons extradited to UK
109. Paragraphs 31 to 33 amend section 243 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 101 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 and section 47 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 to provide that time served abroad while awaiting extradition to the UK can be considered for deduction from the person’s eventual UK sentence, subject to judicial discretion in line with domestic sentencing legislation. Without the amendments, credit could not be given in cases where the person is convicted before he is extradited, but is not sentenced until after he is extradited. There were also no provisions to give credit to juveniles sentenced to a detention and training order. The amendments apply regardless of when the person is convicted or sentenced in the UK, and regardless of the person’s age
Amendments consequential on amendments in Part 1
110. Paragraph 34 provides for an amendment to the Bail Act 1976 which is consequential on the amendments in relation to the provisions amending “unlawfully at large”.
111. Paragraph 35 amends Schedule 9 to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 in respect of amendments to have effect on the Extradition Act 2003, substituting “Supreme Court” for “House of Lords”.
Section 43 - Designation of the United States of America
112. Section 43(1) makes provision for an amendment to be made to the 2003 Act (Designation of Part 2 Territories) Order 2003, which would restore the requirement for the US to provide prima facie evidence with its extradition requests to the UK.
113. Section 43(2) provides that an order bringing such an amendment into force may not be made within 12 months of the day on which the Police and Justice Act 2006 was passed (i.e. 8 November 2006), nor may such an order be made if the instruments of ratification of the 2003 Extradition Treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom have been exchanged.
114. In addition, the effect of subsection (3) is that the Secretary of State is not obliged to make a commencement order bringing section 43(1) into force unless both Houses of Parliament have passed a resolution requiring him to do so. In that case he would be under a duty to make such an order within a month of the resolutions being passed (subsection (4)).
Section 67: Article 26 alerts
115. These provisions are designed to ensure that the UK is in a position to deal with alerts transmitted via the second generation SISII which request the arrest of a person for extradition purposes.
Section 68 – Article 95 Alerts
116. Section 68 allows that all article 95 (Schengen) alerts issued at the request of an authority of a category 1 territory fall to be regarded as arrest warrants issued by that authority. This will ensure that information contained in an article 95 alert (together with any information transmitted with it) will fall to be considered by the designated authority in determining whether it amounts to a Part 1 warrant which may be certified under section 2 of the 2003 Act. This will allow the UK to meet its obligation to validate existing article 95 alerts prior to the UK beginning to send and receive data via SISII.
Deferral of extradition- Section 69: Extradition to category 1 territory and Section 70 Extradition to category 2 territory
117. Section 69 inserts section 8A into the 2003 Act and section 70 inserts section 76A into the 2003 Act. These provisions require the appropriate judge to adjourn extradition proceedings on the basis of a domestic prosecution where the judge is informed of this fact after a person has been brought before him or her, but before the extradition hearing has begun. Section 8A covers proceedings under Part 1 of the 2003 Act and section 76A covers proceedings under Part 2 of the 2003 Act.
118. Sections 23 and 89 of the 2003 Act provide that where the appropriate judge is informed that the person in question is serving a sentence of imprisonment or another form of detention in the UK the judge may adjourn the extradition hearing until that sentence has been served. These powers only apply, however, once the extradition hearing has begun. Section 23 covers proceedings under Part 1 of the 2003 Act and section 89 covers proceedings under Part 2 of the 2003 Act.
119. Section 69 inserts section 8B into the 2003 Act and section 70 inserts section 76B into the 2003 Act. These provisions allow the appropriate judge to adjourn extradition proceedings on the basis of a domestic sentence after a person has been brought before him or her, before the extradition hearing has begun. Section 8B covers proceedings under Part 1 of the 2003 Act and section 76B covers proceedings under Part 2 of the 2003 Act.
Section 71: Person charged with offence or serving sentence of imprisonment
120. This section amends various provisions of the 2003 Act so as to make it clear that where consideration of an extradition request is deferred in order to allow domestic proceedings to be concluded or a UK prison sentence to be served, consideration of the extradition request should recommence once the person is released from detention pursuant to any sentence imposed.
Section 72: Return from category 1 territory
121. Section 72 inserts a new section 59 into the 2003 Act. This section applies to cases where a person is serving a sentence of imprisonment in the UK, is then extradited to a category 1 territory under a EAW and then returns to the UK. The section sets out what happens when this person returns to the UK to serve the remainder of the UK sentence or otherwise returns to the UK. Subsection (2) provides that time spent outside the UK as a result of the extradition is not deducted from the UK sentence when the person returns. Subsections (3) and (4), however, make it clear that time spent in custody abroad should be deducted from a UK sentence where the person was held in custody in connection with the extradition offence or any other offence in respect of which they could be dealt with as a result of the extradition request and that person was not convicted of the offence in question.
122. Subsection (5) provides that if the person extradited to a category 1 territory then returns to the UK and is not entitled to be released from detention pursuant to their UK sentence, then they are liable to be detained and should be treated as unlawfully at large if at large. Subsection (6) deals with cases where a person returning to the UK is entitled to be released from detention on licence. Subsection (6)(a) states that if a licence was in force at the time of extradition then the licence will be suspended during their absence from the UK but will have effect on return. Subsection (7) also provides that if no licence was imposed when the person was extradited, then the person in question may be detained in any place in which they could have been detained prior to extradition. Subsection (8) then provides that a constable or immigration officer may take this person into custody for the purpose of conveying them to the place of detention referred to in subsection (7). Subsection (9) provides that where a person has been taken into custody and detained under these powers they must be released on license within five days of being taken into custody under this section. Subsection (10) provides that in calculating the period of five days, no account should be taken of weekends and public holidays. Subsection (11) defines when a person is to be regarded as entitled to be released from detention. Subsection (12) makes it clear that the powers set out in subsection (8) are exercisable throughout the UK.
Section 73: Return from category 2 country
123. Section 73 inserts a new section 132 into the 2003 Act. This section applies to cases where a person serving a sentence of imprisonment in the UK, is then extradited to a territory designated by order under Part 2 of the 2003 Act (a category 2 territory) and subsequently returns to the UK. The section sets out what happens when this person returns to the UK to serve the remainder of the UK sentence or otherwise returns to the UK.
Section 74 Return to extraditing territory
124. Section 74 repeals sections 143 and 144 of the 2003 Act and inserts new sections 153A, 153B and 153C. These provisions provide a regime within which the UK will be able to provide undertakings as to a person’s treatment in the UK and eventual return to a requested territory. Unlike sections 143 and 144, the new provisions will facilitate the provisions of
Section 75 Cases in which sentence treated as served
125. Section 75 amends two provisions of the 2003 Act to ensure consistency with sentencing legislation and to ensure section 152 of the 2003 Act applies where someone is extradited to the UK from a territory which is neither a category 1 or a category 2 territory.
Section 76 Dealing with person for other offences
126. Section 76 replaces section 151 of the 2003 Act with a new section 151A. This section deals with situations where the UK would want to deal with an offence committed by a person previously extradited to the UK for the purposes of prosecution for a different offence.
Section 77 Provisional arrest
127. Section 77 amends section 6 of the 2003 Act so as to exclude weekends and certain specified holidays from the calculation of the 48 hour period during which a person provisionally arrested under section 5 of the 2003 Act must be brought before, and relevant documents provided to, the appropriate judge. Section 77 also provides a mechanism by which the time limit for providing the relevant documents to the appropriate judge may be extended by up to 48 hours.
Section 78 Use of live link in extradition proceedings
128. This section amends the 2003 Act to make it possible for a judge to give a live link direction in hearings before the judge other than the extradition hearing itself and other than any extradition proceedings which post date surrender. This section applies to all extradition related hearings in Parts 1 and 2 of the 2003 Act apart from the substantive extradition hearing and any hearings post dating surrender
129. Section 50 of the Crime and Courts Act gives effect Schedule 20. Part 1 of Schedule 20 amends the 2003 Act to provide for a new forum bar to extradition. Forum concerns the place where a person ought to be prosecuted for an offence he or she is alleged to have committed.
130. The amendments to the 2003 Act would require the judge at an extradition hearing to consider the issue of forum when deciding whether an individual should be extradited to face prosecution. Paragraphs 3 and 6 of Schedule 20 insert new sections 19B and 83A into the 2003 Act, which provide that extradition can be barred by reason of forum if the judge decides that: firstly, a substantial measure of the relevant activity was performed in the UK; and secondly, having regard to a list of specified matters, it would not be in the interests of justice for the extradition to take place. Subsection (3) of new sections 19B and 83A outlines the specified matters relating to the interests of justice: (i) where most of the harm or loss occurred; (ii) the interests of any victims; (iii) any belief of a UK prosecutor that the UK is not the most appropriate place to prosecute the person; (iv) whether evidence needed to prosecute the person is or could be made available in the UK; (v) any delay that may result in proceeding in one country rather than another; (vi) the desirability and practicality of all prosecutions relating to the offence taking place in one place; and (vii) the person’s connections with the UK.
131. Paragraphs 3 and 6 also insert new sections 19C, 19D and 19E, and 83B, 83C and 83D into the 2003 Act, which provide that extradition cannot be barred on forum grounds if a designated prosecutor issues a certificate that he or she has: firstly, considered the offences for which the person could be prosecuted in the UK; secondly, decided that there are one or more such offences which correspond to the extradition offence; and, thirdly, decided that either the person should not be prosecuted in the UK for a corresponding offence because the prosecutor believes that there is insufficient admissible evidence or it would not be in the public interest, or believes that the person should not be prosecuted in the UK because of concerns about disclosure of sensitive material. A designated prosecutor may apply for an adjournment in the proceedings in order to consider whether to give a certificate. The certificate can be challenged, but only as part of an appeal to the High Court under the 2003 Act. The High Court must apply the procedures and principles of judicial review when reviewing a certificate. If the High Court quashes a certificate, it must then consider the issue of forum. The forum provisions do not apply in Scotland.
132. Part 2 of Schedule 20 amend the 2003 Act to provide that in Part 2 cases, that is those involving extradition to non-EU Member States with which the UK has extradition relations, human rights issues, including those raised after the end of the normal statutory process, must not be considered by the Secretary of State, but may be raised with the courts right up until the time of surrender. At present, human rights matters in Part 2 cases are considered by the judge at an extradition hearing and any subsequent appeal hearing(s). However, once the appeal process is complete, but before the person’s surrender has taken place, the person may raise human rights issues with the Secretary of State, but only new representations that have not already been considered by the courts.
133. Paragraphs 10 to 13 of the new Schedule amend the process by ensuring that the Secretary of State is not to consider human rights issues raised after the end of the statutory appeal process or indeed at any time during the Part 2 process. Instead, in cases where the person wishes to raise late human rights issues he or she will be able to give notice of appeal out of time. The High Court will consider the appeal if it is satisfied that: (i) the appeal is necessary to avoid real injustice; and (ii) the circumstances are exceptional and make it appropriate to consider the appeal. This provision does not apply in Scotland
134. Part 3 of Schedule 20 addresses concerns raised by the UK Supreme Court about certain aspects of the operation of the 2003 Act when an appeal of a devolution issue is made to the UK Supreme Court under the Scotland Act 1998. Part 3 of the Schedule principally provides that where the authority or territory seeking a person’s extradition intends to appeal to the UK Supreme Court against the determination of a devolution issue, the court must remand the person whose extradition is sought in custody or on bail.
135. Part 12 of the Anti-social Behaviour Crime & Policing Act 2014 (‘the 2014 Act’) makes a number of changes to the 2003 Act – in particular, on the EAW (set out below), but at the time of writing, these provisions have yet to be commenced. The main provisions are set out below:
Appeals
136. Section 160 of the 2014 Act amends sections 26, 28, 103, 105,108 and 110 of the 2003 Act, which deal with appeal rights in Part 1 and Part 2 cases. Presently, there is an automatic right of appeal without leave for both the requested person and the requesting territory against extradition decisions (as set out above). Section 160 changes the position so that the leave of the High Court is required for all appeals. This change was intended to reduce the numbers of unmeritorious appeals.
137. Section 160 of the 2014 Act also amends sections 26, 103 and 108 to the effect that the High Court must not refuse to hear an appeal by a requested person solely because it was submitted out of time, so long as the requested person did everything reasonably possible to ensure that notice was given as soon as possible.
Speciality waiver protection
138. Section 163 of the 2014 Act repeals sections 45(3) and 128(5) of the 2003 Act. The effect is that when a person consents to his/her extradition s/he will no longer lose the benefit of any speciality protection s/he would otherwise enjoy. At present, a person who consents to extradition loses the benefit of any speciality s/he would otherwise enjoy. This change will enable those who wish to be extradited to be surrendered quickly without risking being tried for any other alleged offences committed before their extradition.
Asylum
139. Section 162 of the 2014 Act amends sections 39 and 121 of the 2003 Act, to ensure that a person who has made an asylum claim (either before or after the initiation of extradition proceedings) must not be extradited before that claim has been finally determined. At present, the 2003 Act only prohibits extradition while there is an outstanding asylum claim, if that claim was made after the start of extradition proceedings.
140. Section 162 also amends section 93 of the 2003 Act (which deals with the Secretary of State’s consideration of Part 2 cases), to give the Secretary of State the power to discharge the person if the person has been granted:
141. This mirrors the powers which the Secretary of State has under section 70 of the 2003 Act, which applies at the initial stage of proceedings (that is, when the Secretary of State receives a request and must decide whether to issue a certificate). This amendment will provide the Secretary of State with the power to discharge people who are granted status or leave after the certificate has been issued.
Non-UK extradition: transit through the UK
142. New sections 189A to 189E were also inserted into the 2003 Act. The new sections makes provision for the issue of certificates to facilitate the transit through the UK of a person who is being extradited from one territory to another territory (where neither of those territories is the UK). Where the destination territory is a Part 1 territory, it will be for the NCA to issue a certificate. In any other case, it will be for the Secretary of State to issue a certificate.
143. A certificate will authorise a constable or other authorised officer to escort the person from one form of transportation to another, to take the person into custody to facilitate the transit and/or to search the person (and any item in his or her possession) for (and seize) any item which the person may use to cause physical injury (or, in a case where he or she has been taken into custody, to escape from custody).
144. The new sections also deal with cases where a person is being extradited from one territory to another (where neither of those territories is the UK) and he or she makes an unscheduled arrival in the UK. It allows a constable to take the person into custody, for a maximum period of 72 hours, to facilitate the transit of the person through the UK.
145. The new section places a duty on the Secretary of State to issue a code of practice governing the exercise of the powers in the new sections. The Secretary of State is required to publish the code in draft form, consider any representations made on the draft and, if considered appropriate, amend the code accordingly. Failure by a police constable or other authorised officer to adhere to any code issued will not of itself make the officer liable under either criminal or civil proceedings. A code of practice made under this section can be admitted in court as evidence.
146. It also defines an “authorised officer” as a constable or a person who is of a description specified by the Secretary of State by order.
Proceedings on deferred warrant or request
147. The 2003 Act was also amended to ensure that in cases where there are competing extradition requests and one case has been deferred pending the outcome of the other, a judge can only resume proceedings in the deferred cases, or order, that extradition is no longer deferred, in cases where the competing request has been disposed of in the requested person’s favour.
Extradition to a territory that is party to an international convention
148. Another new section introduced to the 2003 Act enabled the Secretary of State to designate international conventions and specify conduct in relation to those conventions. Previously the 2003 Act allowed the Secretary of State to designate territories which are parties to conventions. However, as territories frequently sign up to conventions, the section proved difficult to keep updated.
149. Under the new section, the Secretary of State will only need to designate conventions to which the UK is a party and specify conduct to which the relevant convention applies. In the event that a party to one of those conventions then made an extradition request for a person, it would be open to the Secretary of State to certify that:
150. The effect would be that the 2003 Act would apply to the person’s extradition as if the requesting territory were a territory designated under Part 2 of the 2003 Act. Examples of Conventions that could be designated include the UN Conventions on terrorism, the UN Convention against Corruption and the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime.
151. The government made a number of changes to the 2003 Act using the Anti-social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014 in order to improve the operation of the EAW scheme. These are set out below;
Proportionality
152. A new subsection under section 2 of the 2003 Act has been introduced in order to provide for the designated authority to operate an administrative proportionality filter in cases where the Part 1 warrant has been issued for the purpose of prosecuting the person for an offence.
153. The aim is to enable the NCA to filter out the most disproportionate cases from reaching court. It provides that the designated authority may not issue a certificate under section 2 of the 2003 Act where it is clear that a judge proceeding under (new) section 21A would be required to order the person’s discharge on proportionality grounds.
154. New section 21A into the 2003 Act will be introduced, which will require the courts, in cases where an EAW has been issued in prosecution cases, to consider whether extradition would be:
This new section deals with Part 1 cases where the person is wanted for the purpose of prosecution for an offence. The judge will have to take into account (so far as the judge thinks appropriate):
155. The judge will not be able to take into account any other matters. If the judge decides that extradition would be disproportionate, the judge will have to discharge the person.
Absence of a prosecution decision
156. The changes also provide for a new bar to extradition in Part 1cases on the grounds of “absence of prosecution decision” (section 12A).
157. This is intended to ensure that a case is sufficiently advanced in the issuing State (that is, there is a clear intention to bring the person to trial) before extradition can occur, so that people do not spend potentially long periods in pre-trial detention following their extradition, whilst the issuing State continues to investigate the offence.
158. This new section will ensure that, in cases where the person is wanted to stand trial, extradition can only go ahead where the issuing State has made a decision to charge the person and a decision to try the person (or is ready to make those decisions).
159. Where it appears to the judge, that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a decision to charge and a decision to try have not both been taken in the issuing State (and that the person’s absence from that State is not the only reason for that), extradition will be barred unless the issuing State can prove that those decisions have been made (or that the person’s absence from that State is the only reason for the failure to take the decision(s)).
160. The courts have interpreted the provisions of the 2003 Act in a “cosmopolitan” way[19]19, mindful of the differences in criminal procedure in other Member States, and it is anticipated that the courts will apply the same approach to the interpretation of section 12A and, in particular, the concepts “decision to charge” and “decision to try”.
Request for Temporary Transfer
161. A new section 21B has been inserted into the 2003 Act which will apply where the EAW has been issued for the purposes of prosecuting the person for an offence.
162. It will allow, with both the requested person’s and the issuing State’s consent, the person’s temporary transfer to the issuing State or for the person to speak with the authorities in that State while he or she remains in the UK (for example, by video link).
163. Either party will be able to make a request to this effect. The judge must, if the judge thinks it necessary, (to allow the other party to consider whether to consent to a request) adjourn proceedings for up to seven days. If that party gives consent, the judge must adjourn proceedings for as long as seems necessary to allow the temporary transfer or conversation to take place.
164. A person will not be able to make a request for temporary transfer if he or she has already consented to a request by the issuing State for temporary transfer (and likewise as regards speaking with the authorities of the issuing State whilst remaining in the UK).
165. Similarly, a person will only be able to make one request for temporary transfer (and one request to speak with the authorities of the issuing State whilst remaining in the UK).
166. The effect of this provision will, in some cases, be likely to be the withdrawal of the EAW; for example, in cases where, having spoken with the person, the issuing State decides that he or she is not the person they are seeking or that he or she did not in fact commit the offence in question.
167. In other cases, where extradition goes ahead, the person may spend less time in pre-trial detention, as some of the questions which need to be asked and the processes which need to happen ahead of the trial could take place during or as a result of the temporary transfer or conversation.
168. Although, extradition is a reserved matter in Scotland many of the roles of the Secretary of State fall to Scottish Ministers.
169. Scottish Ministers must issue a certificate where they receive a valid extradition request in respect of a person who is believed to be in Scotland, they unless they decide that a competing request is to take priority, when they may order proceedings in respect of one request to be deferred until the other has been disposed of. The Ministers send the case to the sheriff at Edinburgh. A warrant for the requested persons arrest is sought by the Lord Advocate and if granted issued by him to the Police Scotland Fugitives Unit for execution. On arrest the requested person will appear at Edinburgh Sheriff Court. If the sheriff decides extradition does not breach the requested person’s convention rights, the sheriff sends the case to the Scottish Ministers for their decision on extradition. The Scottish Ministers must issue their decision within two months of receipt of the case.
170. Where the sheriff sends a case to the Scottish Ministers for their decision, they must decide whether they are prohibited from extraditing the person for any of the following reasons
(a) it is the offence in respect of which he was extradited;
(b) an extradition offence disclosed by the same facts as that offence;
(c) an offence in respect of which the Scottish Ministers have consented to the person being dealt with; or
(d) an offence in respect of which the person has waived his right not to be dealt with.
Speciality arrangements also exist where a person is given an opportunity to leave the territory before he is dealt with in respect of an offence committed before his extradition. Speciality arrangements made with a category 2 territory, which is also a Commonwealth country or British overseas territory, may be made either generally or for particular cases;
171. Where any of these reasons are found, the Scottish Ministers must order the person's discharge. Where these prohibitions do not apply, the Scottish Ministers must order extradition unless:
172. Where a person is charged with an offence in the UK, the Scottish Ministers must not make a decision with regard to his extradition until the charge is disposed of or withdrawn, or proceedings in respect of the charge are discontinued, or the diet is deserted pro loco et tempore. Where a case is before the Scottish Ministers and the person is serving a sentence in the United Kingdom, the Scottish Ministers may defer making a decision in respect of extradition until the sentence has been served. Where the Scottish Ministers do not make a decision within two months of the appropriate day and the person in question applies to the High Court to be discharged, he must be discharged.
173. Where the Scottish Ministers order a person's extradition, they must inform him of the order, inform him in ordinary language of his right of appeal to the High Court and inform any person acting on behalf of the category 2 territory of the order. Where the Scottish Ministers have received an assurance that the death penalty will not be imposed or exercised, they must also give the person a copy of that assurance. In Scotland an order for extradition or discharge under these provisions must be made by a member of the Scottish government or a junior Scottish Minister or a senior official who is a member of the staff of the Scottish Administration
174. An appeal may be brought against the decision of the Scottish Ministers to order extradition irrespective of any appeal against the decision of the sheriff.
ANNEXES
Annex A – Extraditable offences under the EAW framework decision
Annex B – Statistical information Annex C – Territory information Annex D – Statutory instruments
Extraditable offences under the EAW scheme as defined in the EU Framework Decision
In cases where a person is wanted for prosecution the offence must usually be one that could lead to a maximum prison sentence of at least 12 months in the requesting state. For certain offences that are listed in the framework decision and which could lead to a maximum prison sentence of at least 3 years in the requesting state, there is no requirement that a parallel offence exists in UK law. Otherwise the conduct complained of in the EAW must also be an offence in the UK. Where the person is wanted to serve a sentence, whether or not the offence is deemed an extradition offence depends on various factors including the length of sentence imposed in the other state.
1 Participation in a criminal organisation.
2 Terrorism.
3 Trafficking in human beings.
4 Sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.
5 Illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
6 Illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives.
7 Corruption.
8 Fraud, including that affecting the financial interests of the European Communities within the meaning of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests.
9 Laundering of the proceeds of crime.
10 Counterfeiting currency, including of the euro.
11 Computer-related crime.
12 Environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties.
13 Facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence.
14 Murder, grievous bodily injury.
15 Illicit trade in human organs and tissue.
16 Kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking.
17 Racism and xenophobia.
18 Organised or armed robbery.
19 Illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art.
20 Swindling.
21 Racketeering and extortion.
22 Counterfeiting and piracy of products.
23 Forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein.
24 Forgery of means of payment.
25 Illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters.
26 Illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials.
27 Trafficking in stolen vehicles.
28 Rape.
29 Arson.
30 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
31 Unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships.
32 Sabotage.
Statistical information
EAW cases INCOMING
Year | Number of EAWs received by the UK | Number of persons arrested pursuant to EAWs | Number of surrenders |
2009-10 | 3870 | 1057 | 772 |
2010-11 | 5770 | 1295 | 1100 |
2011-12 | 5641 | 1394 | 1076 |
2012-13 | 6263 | 1438 | 1057 |
2013-14 | 7881 | 1660 | 1067 |
|
|
|
|
EAW cases OUTGOING
Year | Number of EAWs issued by the UK | Number of persons arrested pursuant to EAWs | Number of surrenders |
2009-10 | 238 | 142 | 110 |
2010-11 | 241 | 150 | 130 |
2011-12 | 252 | 148 | 144 |
2012-13 | 244 | 133 | 123 |
2013-14 | 230 | 170 | 140 |
|
|
|
|
Part 2 incoming
Year | Number of requests received by the UK | Number of surrenders |
2009-10 | 80 | 40 |
2010-11 | 102 | 27 |
2011-12 | 70 | 28 |
2012-13 | 84 | 31 |
|
|
|
Part 2 outgoing
Year | Number of requests made by the UK | Number of Surrenders |
2009-10 | 34 | 24 |
2010-11 | 37 | 24 |
2011-12 | 51 | 19 |
2012-13 | 39 | 28 |
|
|
|
Territory information
Designation |
Country |
|---|---|
Category 1 |
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. |
Category 2
Countries in bold are not required to provide prima facie evidence in support of their request for extradition.
In 1991, when the ECE came into force in the UK, the prima facie requirement was dispensed with in respect of all signatories to the ECE. This position was carried through into the designations of States under the 2003 Act.
For the US, Australia, Canada and New Zealand – the prima facie requirement was removed on the basis that they were democratic states and trusted extradition partners. |
Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, The Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cook Islands, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Haiti, Iceland, India, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Macedonia (FYR), Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Nauru, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Western Samoa, Zambia and Zimbabwe |
Statutory instruments
The Extradition Act 2003 (Designation of Prosecutors) (England and Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2013
2013 No. 2388
The Extradition Appeals (England and Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2013
2013 No. 2384
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2013
2013 No. 1583
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2010
2010 No. 861
The Extradition Act 2003 (Specification of Category 1 Territories) Order 2009
2009 No. 2768
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2008
2008 No. 1589
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2007
2007 No. 2238
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2006
2006 No. 3451
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) (No.2) Order 2005
2005 No. 2036
The Extradition Act 2003 (Part 3 Designation) (Amendment) Order 2005
2005 No. 1127
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2005
2005 No. 365
The Extradition Act 2003 (Parties to International Conventions) Order 2005
2005 No. 46
The Extradition Act 2003 (Amendment to Designations) Order 2004
2004 No. 1898
The Extradition Act 2003 (Repeals) Order 2004
2004 No. 1897
Act of Adjournal (Criminal Procedure Rules Amendment No. 3) (Extradition etc.) 2004
2004 No. 346
The Extradition Act 2003 (Police Powers: Codes of Practice) Order 2003
2003 No. 3336
The Extradition Act 2003 (Part 3 Designation) Order 2003
2003 No. 3335
The Extradition Act 2003 (Designation of Part 2 Territories) Order 2003
2003 No. 3334
The Extradition Act 2003 (Designation of Part 1 Territories) Order 2003
2003 No. 3333
The Extradition Act 2003 (Commencement and Savings) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2003
2003 No. 3312 (C. 131)
The Extradition Act 2003 (Commencement and Savings) (Amendment) Order 2003
2003 No. 3258 (C. 128)
The Extradition Act 2003 (Multiple Offences) Order 2003
2003 No. 3150
The Extradition Act 2003 (Part 1 Designated Authorities) Order 2003
2003 No. 3109
The Extradition Act 2003 (Police Powers) (Northern Ireland) Order 2003
2003 No. 3107
The Extradition Act 2003 (Police Powers) Order 2003
2003 No. 3106
The Extradition Act 2003 (Commencement and Savings) Order 2003
2003 No. 3103 (C. 122)
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/117676/extradition-act-2003.pdf
[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/117680/european-arrest-warrant.pdf
[3] A customary rule of extradition law which is intended to ensure that a person is not dealt with in the state requesting his extradition for any offence other than that for which he is extradited.
[4] SISII is an EU-wide IT system at the centre of Schengen cooperation. It is a large-scale database used for law enforcement, immigration and border controls in the EU. It was conceived as a tool to deal with any insecurity brought about by the lifting of EU internal borders (not including the UK) under the Schengen regime. SISII allows competent national authorities to issue and consult on various alerts. The SISII system combines data from all Member States so that they can receive alerts in real time.
[5] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78977/coalition_programme_for_gove rnment.pdf (section 6 - Crime & Policing, page 14 refers)
[6] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/117673/extradition-review.pdf
[7] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228566/8458.pdf
[8] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt201012/jtselect/jtrights/156/156.pdf
[9] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/236002/8464.pd
[10] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmhaff/644/644.pdf
[11] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/236001/8465.pdf
[12] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/117675/extradition-codes-of- practice.pdf
[13] The Extradition Act 2003 (Designation of Part 1 Territories) Order 2003
[14] The Extradition Act 2003 (Part 1 Designated Authorities) Order 2003
[15] The Extradition Act 2003 (Designation of Part 2 Territories) Order 2003
[16] Paragraph 3 of Schedule 13 to the Police and Justice Act 2006
[17] Section 143, 144 deleted by the Policing and Crime Act 2009
[18] Sections 151A, 153 A-D and 155A inserted by the Policing and Crime Act 2009 ( Section 151 was deleted by the same Act)
[19] Asztaslos v Szekszard City Court Hungary [2010] EWHC 237 (Admin)