Opinion: extradition laws reveal how nations view themselves and how they seek to engage with the world
Earlier this month, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the extradition regime agreed between the European Union and the United Kingdom post Brexit would also be automatically applicable to Ireland. In stating this, the court was rejecting the argument made by two men that there was no longer a legal basis for them to be extradited from Ireland to the UK since the UK had left the EU.
The ruling allayed fears that Brexit would cause too significant a disruption having removed the UK from the European Arrest Warrant system, which has been credited with creating a relatively straightforward, clear and transparent process in matters relating to extradition between EU member states. It was this system that aided and accelerated the extradition to Ireland of high-profile fugitives such as Gerry Hutch from Spain and Jonathan Keogh from the UK.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Morning Ireland, RTÉ Crime Correspondent Paul Reynolds discusses the arrest and extradition of Gerry Hutch over the Regency Hotel murder case in 2016
Despite this, European Arrest Warrant itself has had a controversial life with the constitutional courts of various member states taking issue with the supposed overreach of EU law that its provisions were encouraging in relation to national laws. Further questions arose out of the vague language used to define 'judicial authorities' responsible for initiating the warrants especially with regards to whether this included the police and ministries, apart from courts. Those worries have since largely been subdued by various judgements of the EU’s Court of Justice that have elaborated on these issues and ruled that political, administrative and police bodies are not judicial authorities for this purpose.
Until recently, Ireland was one of the few EU members not participating in the Schengen Information System, a widely used information sharing system pertaining to security issues within the EU. This ostensibly prompted some wanted suspects to relocate to the country. The causes underpinning this concerning situation has now seemingly been rectified with Ireland joining the information system, leading to requests for extraditions from other EU member states, to nearly triple in a short span, putting the High Court under pressure.
The presence of such a multi-layered system within the EU has caused other individuals and persons of interest to flee its member states’ jurisdictions. Some like Daniel Kinihan, identified in the High Court in Dublin as a senior figure in organised crime on a global scale, have left for the United Arab Emirates, with which Ireland has no extradition treaty.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ 1's Six One News, Daniel Kinahan denies involvement in criminality
This pattern of individuals finding safe havens outside the EU has led to EUROPOL, the EU's law enforcement agency, coordinating efforts to identify, locate and extradite such ‘high value’ targets. In Dubai's case, these concerns have further been amplified by the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and the subsequent possibility of increasing drug trafficking to the EU, with Dubai serving as a point of transit.
Extradition processes may not constitute part of the core issues that define inter-state negotiations, but the need for extradition treaties to cover more bilateral relationships and to evolve to meet international standards is becoming more acute, as transnational crime structures become more complex. This is further complicated by the extraordinary variations that exist in how countries view and interpret these standards and the lack of any widely accepted or established international efforts that have succeeded in harmonizing them.
There is a need for multi-lateral initiatives to build upon the foundations laid down by prominent regional actions such as the European Convention on Extradition of 1957 (largely replaced by the European Arrest Warrant), the Inter-American Convention on Extradition of 1981. Conventions that may be focusing principally on other issues still incorporate extradition clauses into their purview and protocols.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Archives, Patrick Cosgrave reports for Newsbeat in 1965 on a new bill which will regularise extradition proceedings between Ireland and Britain
In this context, extradition treaties often serve as extensions of how nations perceive their individual relationships with each other. They reflect the realpolitk factors that influence the selection of relationships for which they are willing to effectively cede sections of their sovereignty. This can often lead to complicated wrangling in front of courts with desperate defendants striving to construct dark portrayals of the legal systems, institutions and authorities of the places to which they may be facing extradition.
For example, the presence of the death penalty in certain jurisdictions as opposed to others is of particular concern in this regard. There is also the possibility that extradited individuals may be subjected to varying forms of threats and torture, political persecution or face inhumane prison conditions or not be given a fair trial.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's News at One, Vincent McAviney reports on the London High Court ruling which allows for Julian Assange to be extradited to the US
Guarantees customised to the circumstances of each case are therefore often provided by nations before individuals are extradited to them, in order to placate such concerns. Such a scenario is currently playing out in front of a British court in the case of Julian Assange. The Australian citizen is wanted by the United States in connection with a case pertaining to the leaks of thousands of classified documents, through his Wikileaks organisation, including on civilians being killed by US military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Earlier this year, a district judge ruled that Assange should not be extradited to the US due to concerns for his mental health. This was challenged by US authorities who launched an appeal and proposed assurances including that he would not be held in certain highly restrictive prison facilities and that he could appeal to serve his sentence in Australia, if convicted.
This convinced the UK High Court of Justice, which leaned on these assurances last week to rule that Assange could be extradited, stating that any risk of suicide was "excluded by the assurances". An appeal to the UK Supreme Court, that is likely to be deeply contested and influential, is expected.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
