Product Description

The Blackstone's Guide Series is a well established series of practical guides to the latest new legislation. The Guides all contain a full copy of the Act together with commentary on the effects, extent and scope of the legislation. The Guides are concise, accessible and clearly laid out, essential tools for those practising in the area. The Extradition Act 2003 came into force on 1st January 2004. The Act is a major piece of legislation and will radically overhaul current extradition procedure with the aim of simplifying and speeding up the extradition process. It will give effect to the European Arrest Warrant, which for the first time will allow foreign warrants to be directly enforced in the UK. The Act also contains important human rights protections for the fugitive and so the inter-relationship between extradition and human rights is fully covered in the text. This Guide places the new Act in the context of the previous extradition regime and provides a full commentary on the Act. Although the Act will replace the current wide array of provisions contained in the Extradition Act 1989, many of its provisions are derived from the existing regime. The Guide therefore draws on existing case law in order to make sense of the new Act for the reader. The Guide deals with the extradition process in chronological order and is fully cross-referenced, allowing for easy use in court. In addition, the Guide will contain useful appendices including the European Arrest Warrant making it an essential reference work for all those practising in the extradition and international crime field.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #719912 in Books
• Published on: 2004-04-29
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 432 pages

About the Author
Julian B. Knowles is a barrister at Matrix Chambers, and was called in 1994. He is listed as one of the Legal 500's leading civil liberties juniors, has extensive experience of extradition cases including the House of Lords and Privy Council, and was principal junior counsel for General Pinochet in his extradition proceedings. He has co-authored "The Law of Extradition and Mutual Assistance" with Clive Nicholls QC and Clare Montgomery QC. He has also written a number of relevant
chapter contributions and is currently co-authoring a new edition of "Human Rights and Criminal Law".

Customer Reviews

Useful, critical account of the Extradition Act
Julian Knowles, a barrister at the Matrix Chambers, has written a critical account of the Extradition Act 2003. Extradition is the process whereby one sovereign state asks another to return someone so that he may be brought to trial on criminal charges. The Act resulted from the EU's Treaty of Amsterdam 1997, which defined a new 'European Legal Space' based on the 'Mutual Recognition of Foreign Judgements'.
Knowles points out that the Act originated from two fallacies: that proceedings under the Extradition Act 1989 were unnecessarily lengthy, and "that EU countries should have unquestioning deference for each other's legal systems."
As he observes, the Act sacrifices liberty 'in the interests of speedy (and cheap) justice' leaving 'few remaining safeguards for extradition defendants'. The Act 'aims to speed up extradition by removing protections for defendants'.
Under the new European Arrest Warrants, innocent British citizens could be swiftly extradited to EU countries, where we may not get a fair trial. France and Italy, for example, are routinely cited for police brutality and non-respect of defence rights. For the first time, defendants can be extradited for conduct that is not criminal under Britain's domestic law.
Under the European Convention on Human Rights (in force here since 2000), extradition is forbidden if there is a real risk of flagrant denial of justice in the requesting state, e.g. if the trial is based on evidence obtained by torture, or if there is 'a real risk of ill-treatment' of the defendant, or if there is a real risk of the defendant's being sentenced to death. For example, in 2002, a British court quashed Blunkett's decision to return Mr Ramda to France because of unanswered allegations that the French police had obtained evidence against him through torture.

And in April 2003, in an Extradition Treaty with the USA, the government agreed that Britain would extradite British citizens to the USA in future, with no US obligation to produce prima facie evidence of their guilt. The agreement was, typically, one way only. Under this Extradition Act, our courts would have to enforce all such unjust decisions.