Grex Agora46 Conference

Item 142: british extradition to america, no questions asked..

Entered by oval on Sat Aug 2 16:09:04 2003:

New UK-US Extradition Treaty
- removes or restricts key protections for defendants
- signed and adopted without any parliamentary scrutiny

This Special Report is also available in "pdf" format to download: Analysis
no 18

On 31 March, David Blunkett, UK Home Secretary, signed an Extradition Treaty
on behalf of the UK with his United States counterpart, Attorney General Tom
Ashcroft, ostensibly bringing the US into line with procedures between
European countries. The UK parliament was not consulted at all and the text
was not public available until the end of May. The only justification given
for the delay was "administrative reasons", though these did not hold-up
scrutiny by the US senate, which began almost immediately.

The UK-US Treaty has three main effects:

- (1) it removes the requirement on the US to provide prima facie evidence
when requesting the extradition of people from the UK but maintains the
requirement on the UK to satisfy the "probable cause" requirement in the US
when seeking the extradition of US nationals;

- (2) it removes or restricts key protections currently open to suspects and
defendants;

- (3) it implements the EU-US Treaty on extradition, signed in Washington on
25 June 2003, but far exceeds the provisions in this agreement.

An analysis of the new UK-US Treaty - which will replace the 1972 UK-US Treaty
- follows below, together with a number of relevant cases and issues that
raise serious concern about the new agreement (and those between the EU and
US).

Ben Hayes of Statewatch comments:

"Under the new treaty, the allegations of the US government will be enough
to secure the extradition of people from the UK. However, if the UK wants to
extradite someone from the US, evidence to the standard of a "reasonable"
demonstration of guilt will still be required.

No other EU countries would accept this US demand, either politically or
constitutionally. Yet the UK government not only acquiesced, but did so taking
advantage of arcane legislative powers to see the treaty signed and
implemented without any parliamentary debate or scrutiny.

Guantanamo Bay, the failed extradition of Lofti Raissi and US contempt for
the International Criminal Court make this decision to remove relevant UK
safeguards all the more alarming"

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/jul/25ukus.htm
for more details..

8 responses total.

#1 of 8 by twenex on Sat Aug 2 16:32:53 2003:

Grrr.

David Blunkett is a Fascist, btw.


#2 of 8 by sj2 on Sat Aug 2 18:58:40 2003:

So UK is the 53rd US state now?? 


#3 of 8 by sj2 on Sat Aug 2 19:02:08 2003:

Or is this Hillary Rosen's parting shot so that the british can be 
*punished* for swapping songs online? :D


#4 of 8 by sj2 on Sat Aug 2 19:04:57 2003:

Wait wait ... I got a better heading for this post

'Former imperialist power itself becomes a colony'


#5 of 8 by sj2 on Sat Aug 2 19:06:11 2003:

George Michael's portrayal of Tony Blair wasn't so skewed afterall :)))


#6 of 8 by twenex on Sat Aug 2 23:53:09 2003:

Re #4: Ha ha fucking ha ha.


#7 of 8 by pvn on Sun Aug 3 05:28:16 2003:

re#6:Indeed.


#8 of 8 by oval on Sun Aug 3 13:38:19 2003:

ya that would've worked better..



There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: