Watch our INTERPOL & Extradition Act 2003 Webinar which took place on Tuesday 9 March 2021 at 17:30 (GMT) via Zoom.

Presented by our team of expert barristers who specialise in Extradition and INTERPOL:

• Ben Keith
• Louisa Collins
• Amy Woolfson

Topics covered:

• Post-Brexit, INTERPOL has an increased significance in extradition proceedings. The seminar examines how INTERPOL Red Notices and diffusions can be challenged and provides an overview of the new power of arrest contained in the Extradition (Provisional Arrest) Act 2020.
• The seminar also covers practical considerations for those advising clients who are subject to a Red Notice or diffusion.

When is it proportionate to extradite a person for what appear to be minor offences where they are entitled to a retrial?

The section 21A proportionality bar is not available as the Requested Person has already been convicted, even though they would face a retrial on their return. Such “retrial-conviction cases” are potentially complex as they are not explicitly recognised in the Extradition Act 2003. In Saptelei v Romania [2021] EWHC 506 (Admin), 5SAH’s David Josse QC and Mark Smith sought to shine a light on this extradition blind spot.

Proportionality bar
In 2014, Parliament gave a helping hand to extradition defence lawyers by introducing a new proportionality bar under section 21A of the Extradition Act 2003. Unlike Article 8, the court is only permitted to take account of three factors in the proportionality exercise: (i) the seriousness of the offences, (ii) the likely sentence, and (iii) any less coercive measures that could have been taken. However, it is only available in accusation cases.

Konecny v Poland
In Konecny v Poland, the Supreme Court considered whether EAWs in retrial-conviction cases should be treated as accusation warrants. The Supreme Court rejected that argument, but did identify an unfairness in the Extradition Act where the Requested Person is disadvantaged by having been tried in absence. The court decided that the disadvantage under section 14 should be compensated under Article 8. The judgment also opened the door to using Article 8 to compensate for other disadvantages implicit in the Extradition Act for retrial-conviction cases.

Ben Keith, Barrister, Sophia Kerridge, Barrister, both at 5SAH Chambers, London, and Edward Grange, Partner at Corker Binning, London discuss Extradition under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement for NJECL.1

Abstract
When the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) was reached between the UK and the EU on 24 December 2020, it gave extradition practitioners only a few days to identify what, if anything, would remain from the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) system before it came into force on 1 January 2021. The article starts by setting out how the EAW was implemented in the UK prior to 1 January 2021, before turning to the TCA itself and what it means for extradition or ‘surrender’ between EU member states and the UK. In short, the EAW system no longer applies. The authors set out how the TCA provides a degree of continuity, now under the watchful eye of the UK–EU ‘Specialised Committee on Law Enforcement and Judicial Cooperation’. There are notable departures from the EAW system however, in both practical and legal terms, that open the door to increased scrutiny of extradition requests. The authors explore the impact these changes may have on the future of extradition with the EU27, to or from the UK.