Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2005] All ER (D) 383 (May)
Neutral Citation: [2005] EWHC 1051 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division (Divisional Court)
Judge:

Sedley LJ and Pitchers J

Representation Jonathan Ashley-Norman (instructed by Henry Milners) for the first appellant.
  Simon Baker (instructed by Attridge Law) for the second appellant.
  Hugo Keith and Clair Dobbin (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the government.
Judgment Dates: 25 May 2005

Catchwords

Extradition - Extradition hearing - Bar to extradition - Power to seek disclosure of further information - Overlap with earlier scheme - Entrapment - Agent allegedly proposing payment in drugs for radioactive material - United States of America (Extradition) Order 1976, SI 1976/2144 - (Designation of Part 2 Territories) Order 2003, SI 2003/3334.

The Case

Although the United States of America (Extradition) Order 1976, SI1976-2144, had not been revoked, any overlap with the (Designation of Part 2 Territories) Order 2003, SI2003-3334, had been eliminated by the (Commencement and Savings) Order 2003, SI2003-3103, such there were not two parallel schemes governing extradition to the USA. If entrapment was available in domestic courts as a bar to extradition under the it could only be in a case where it had been made out on the facts known to the court and that was not the instant case, notwithstanding it was the government agent that first mentioned drugs. Finally, the nature of the process under Pt2 of the 2003 Act precluded any general remit to secure the production of further material. However, the district judge could, in an appropriate case, invite the Secretary of State to exercise his power under artIX of the bilateral extradition treaty of 1972 to request further information.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.