2009 – ELA Conference
4 November 2009 – ELA Conference
Lord Justice Laws, keynote speech: ‘Extradition: Means and Ends’
with reference to the recent judgment in Bajinya v Government of Rwanda  EWHC 770 (Admin).
With guest speakers:
· Paul Garlick QC: on Rule 39 Applications to the ECtHR
· Michael S. Kim and Robert W. Henoch, former Federal prosecutors: on How Extradition and MLAT Requests are Processed and Supervised within the U.S. Department of Justice on:
– How extradition and MLAT requests are processed and supervised within the U.S. Department of Justice;
– Differences between the U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division and U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division in approaches to extradition;
– The intersection of U.S. Conspiracy law with the dual criminality requirement;
– The use and application of U.S. Obstruction of Justice and False Statement statutes by U.S. prosecutors;
– Trends and strategies in dealing with the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and U.S. antitrust statutes.
Generously sponsored by: Furnival Chambers, Kobre & Kim LLP, Three Raymond Buildings
Discussion points chaired by Charlotte Powell:
- The interface between immigration principles of non-refoulement and bars to extradition where the requested person has extant refugee status in respect of the requesting State (see for example District Court In Ostroleka, Second Criminal Division (A Polish Judicial Authority), v Dytlow & Anor  EWHC 1009 (Admin) (28 April 2009);
- The recent call by Lord Carlisle for a judicial enquiry into how much the British Government knew about the use of inhumane and degrading interview techniques in Guantanamo Bay. The permitted use of evidence obtained as a result at trial in the United Kingdom, if such persons are extradited here to be tried;
- What is the status in law of ad hoc “Memorandum of Understanding”? Should they be used to effect extradition with countries whose conditions of detention routinely violate ECHR standards of treatment, or who are unable to monitor effectively the enforcement of assurances given?
- What is the evidence of specialty breaches upon surrender under the EAW scheme? Are specialty arrangements in the EU effective? What impact ought that empirical evidence to have on principles of mutual trust and the presumption that specialty arrangements will be maintained upon return (see Kucera v. The District Court of Karvina, Czech Republic  4 All ER 80)?
- Why has Parliament not brought the provisions on Forum (section 19B) of the Extradition Act 2003 into force?
- The effect of the impending decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Al-Saadoon v UK on the interpretation of Articles 2, 3, 6, 13 and Protocol 13 ECHR in the extradition context.
- Following the decision of Brown & Ors v Rwanda & Anor  EWHC 770 (Admin), is the United Kingdom a safe haven for persons accused of genocide? Ought a relativist approach to the risk of breach of Article 6 in the context of extradition to be adopted to facilitate extradition (by analogy with the recent House of Lords decision in Wellington  UKHL 72)?