The dawn of a new era in extradition law: the death of s.2 arguments?

George Hepburne-Scott considers the impact of the Supreme Court case of Goluchowski v District Court in Elblag [2016] and its impact on the interpretation of the Framework decision in UK courts with particular reference to the requirements under Article 8(1)(e) of the Framework Decision i.e. the requirement that the EAW contain:

“a description of the circumstances in which the offence was committed, including the time, place and degree of participation in the offence by the requested person”

It seems that due to the expansion in the use of the Article 15 procedure (requests for further information to prop up among other things, the Article 8 requirements), the initial EAW, in the light of Goluchowski and more recent cases, need contain hardly any information as long as it ‘gets there in the end’. Therefore, initially invalid EAW’s can ‘become valid’ through the Article 15 process.

In practice, this seems to mean that an EAW can be in a ‘transient state’ as far as validity is concerned, being invalid and then becoming valid through the provision of further information.

We consider the impact of this approach in terms of the validity of future EAW’s and the reduced scope for challenging them on the basis of non-compliance with Article 8(1)(e) of the Framework Decision.

A full version of this article can be found at New Law Journal (Lexis Nexis UK). This article will form the basis of Mr Hepburne-Scott’s lecture at the III Edition of the Advanced Seminar on Extradition (25-26 June 2018).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *