Javascript must be enabled to continue!
I. Extradition and the European Union
View through CrossRef
To assist effective legal co-operation in combating criminal activity, the Justice and Home Affairs Council of the European Union has recently concluded two new conventions to simplify and improve extradition procedures between member States of the European Union. In doing so, the Council set in motion a process whereby existing arrangements for extradition were examined with a view to making them more flexible. In 1995 the Council recommended that the convention on simplified extradition be adopted in order to fulfil the aim of efficiency in the field of criminal justice. Its aim was to speed up extradition in cases where persons consented to be extradited. However, after further discussion concerning other aspects of extradition the Council eventually recommended that member States adopt far more radical procedures. The 1996 convention relating to “involuntary” extradition between member States appears to bypass several procedures designed to offer a degree of protection for the fugitive offender. Traditionally, extradition procedures have sought to offer a balance between judicial co-operation in the fight against crime and protecting the fundamental rights of the individual, and these concerns are acknowledged within the preambles to both the new EU conventions. However, the new conventions make several alterations to what can be regarded as established extradition procedures. In this article we examine these new procedures and consider whether the balance has shifted too far in favour of law enforcement at the expense of fundamental legal protections.
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Title: I. Extradition and the European Union
Description:
To assist effective legal co-operation in combating criminal activity, the Justice and Home Affairs Council of the European Union has recently concluded two new conventions to simplify and improve extradition procedures between member States of the European Union.
In doing so, the Council set in motion a process whereby existing arrangements for extradition were examined with a view to making them more flexible.
In 1995 the Council recommended that the convention on simplified extradition be adopted in order to fulfil the aim of efficiency in the field of criminal justice.
Its aim was to speed up extradition in cases where persons consented to be extradited.
However, after further discussion concerning other aspects of extradition the Council eventually recommended that member States adopt far more radical procedures.
The 1996 convention relating to “involuntary” extradition between member States appears to bypass several procedures designed to offer a degree of protection for the fugitive offender.
Traditionally, extradition procedures have sought to offer a balance between judicial co-operation in the fight against crime and protecting the fundamental rights of the individual, and these concerns are acknowledged within the preambles to both the new EU conventions.
However, the new conventions make several alterations to what can be regarded as established extradition procedures.
In this article we examine these new procedures and consider whether the balance has shifted too far in favour of law enforcement at the expense of fundamental legal protections.
Related Results
Time for Extradition
Time for Extradition
Abstract
This chapter deals with the time for extradition in Part 1 cases. This covers time for extradition where there is no appeal, and agreement of a later dat...
Bozano Case
Bozano Case
322Human rights — Arrest and detention — Arrest of applicant and deportation from respondent State to third State — Extradition from third State to State of nationality — Whether d...
Liability to Extradition; Extradition Offences
Liability to Extradition; Extradition Offences
Abstract
The first part of this chapter examines the definitions of ‘extradition offence’ in the EA 2003 and the circumstances under which a person becomes liable...
In the Matter of the Requested Extradition of Tuttle United States v. Tuttle
In the Matter of the Requested Extradition of Tuttle United States v. Tuttle
110State succession — Treaties — Extradition treaty — Whether newly-independent State succeeding to rights and obligations under extradition treaty — United Kingdom-United States E...
EXTRADITION: DIRECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT
EXTRADITION: DIRECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT
The study of one of the basic institutions of criminal law and international criminal law is aimed at creating a system of approaches to the development of existing law that can le...
Liability To Extradition; Extradition Offences
Liability To Extradition; Extradition Offences
Abstract
The first part of this chapter examines the circumstances in which a person becomes liable to extradition under the EA 2003 as either an accused person or a...
Striking a Balance: Navigating Exemptions in Extradition for Terrorism and Political Offenses under International Law
Striking a Balance: Navigating Exemptions in Extradition for Terrorism and Political Offenses under International Law
This legal study critically analyzes the complexities of navigating exceptions to extradition, particularly concerning Terrorism and political offenses. It also distinguishes betwe...
In re Schmidt
In re Schmidt
Extradition — Nature of extradition proceedings — Relationship between Executive and judicial roles in extradition — Safeguards against abuse of process — Whether courts of request...

