Overhaul 'Imbalanced' US-UK Extradition Treaty, Urge Influential MPs

Posted: 30/03/2012 06:13 Updated: 30/03/2012 06:22   PA

Gary Mckinnon
Hacker Gary McKinnon, who could be extradited to the United States

Vital extradition arrangements between the UK and the United States are being threatened by the loss of public confidence among Britons, MPs said.

There is a risk that the lack of confidence, fuelled by concerns over a series of high-profile cases, "will translate into wider disaffection", the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee warned.

It called for an overhaul of the controversial 2003 treaty which governs arrangements, saying judges should decide where cases are heard, an initial test of someone's guilt should be considered, and the treaty's text should be changed to ensure it is balanced.

The report comes as Home Secretary Theresa May considers the results of an independent review by former Court of Appeal judge Sir Scott Baker last year, which found the treaty was both balanced and fair.

"The committee is proposing significant changes to the extradition arrangements between the US and the UK not because we are critical of the American justice system but because we recognise the importance of robust extradition arrangements between our two countries," the report said.

"Such extradition arrangements are now threatened by loss of public confidence in the UK and there is a risk that, with time, that lack of confidence will translate into wider disaffection.

"We believe that the government should act now to restore public faith in the treaty."

The committee's review of extradition proceedings comes as retired businessman and all-Kent Golf Club Union president Christopher Tappin, 65, is being held in jail in New Mexico while he awaits trial on arms dealing charges after being extradited last month.

Student Richard O'Dwyer, 23, of Chesterfield, is also fighting extradition after being accused of breaking American copyright laws by using his computer in the UK.

And Asperger's sufferer Gary McKinnon, 46, from Wood Green, north London, is still waiting to hear whether he will be extradited over charges he hacked into US military computers 10 years ago.

Keith Vaz, the committee's chairman, said: "The treaty is unbalanced, making it easier to extradite a British citizen to the USA than vice versa.

"The cases of Gary McKinnon, Richard O'Dwyer and Christopher Tappin have highlighted public concern that these arrangements are one-sided.

"Prosecutors must be required to produce evidence in support of an extradition request and the accused should have the right to challenge that evidence in court."

"British citizens should also be given the opportunity to face trial in the UK. This would save both time and money."

He went on: "It has now been two and half years since the Prime Minister said the Extradition Act should be reviewed and five months since (Sir) Scott Baker produced his report.

"Evidence to the committee has shown that the current arrangements do not protect the rights of British citizens. The government must remedy this immediately."

However the US Ambassador to the UK, Louis B Susman, strongly defended the treaty in a statement to the committee, saying it was fair, balanced and "promotes the interests of justice in both our countries".

"Our extradition treaty continues to be widely and wrongly condemned by some in Parliament and in sections of the British media," he said.

"The constant use of skewed arguments and wilful distortion of the facts by some to advance their own agendas remains of great concern to the United States."

He added: "It would be wrong to view the extradition treaty through the prism of individual cases where sentiment and emotion can cloud reality and lead to misrepresentation."

Susman also said he put his faith "in the courts - in this country and in my own - to reach the right decisions based on facts, on law, and on evidence".

David Bermingham, who was one of the so-called NatWest Three bankers and gave evidence to the committee, called for the government to "recognise the strength of feeling on the issue and act now to put right what they have long known is wrong with this awful law".

Bermingham, 49, of Goring, south Oxfordshire, was jailed for 37 months over an Enron-related fraud in a deal with US prosecutors in 2008 after losing his fight against extradition.

Michael Caplan QC, who represented former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in his extradition case, added there was "clearly much public and political unease" around the UK's arrangements.

The government should make the changes called for by the MPs "without delay", Mr Caplan, a partner at the law firm Kingsley Napley, said.

Speaking on a visit to the US earlier this month, Prime Minister David Cameron raised the issue of the extradition treaty with President Barack Obama.

"We will be following this up with further talks between our teams," Mr Cameron said.

"I recognise that there are concerns about how it is implemented in practice and that's what our teams will look at."

Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil rights group Liberty, said: "No one should be sent abroad without a basic case tested in a local court and it's time the government loosened the straightjacket around our judges to let more cases be tried at home."

A Home Office spokeswoman said: "We thank the Home Affairs Committee for its report on extradition.

"We will consider the detail of the report and respond shortly."

A US Embassy spokeswoman said: "Our experts will be reviewing and considering that report.

"Ambassador Louis Susman's remarks to the Home Affairs Committee clearly state the government US views about the treaty and our bilateral extradition relationship, and these are included in the report."

FOLLOW UK POLITICS

Vital extradition arrangements between the UK and the United States are being threatened by the loss of public confidence among Britons, MPs said. There is a risk that the lack of confidence, fuell...
Vital extradition arrangements between the UK and the United States are being threatened by the loss of public confidence among Britons, MPs said. There is a risk that the lack of confidence, fuell...
Filed by Michael Rundle  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 34
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
03:33 PM on 03/31/2012
The treaty is obviously and glaringly biased in the Americans favour, for goodness sake they wrote it, its in American English and our pathetic New Labour party signed it without examining its contents. And as for the 'independent review by former Court of Appeal judge Sir Scott Baker' oh come on, the man's no more than just another lackey of the establishment, the same type as we have seen in so many other rigged inquiries, the 'Strange death of Dr.Kelly' being the most infamous. We really do have such a shabby, incompetent and inept bunch of people running this country now, no more than grovelling sycophants to the US and EU lining their own pockets to the detriment of the majority of us. The rot set in with Blair and has continued unabated.
02:56 PM on 03/31/2012
This has always been one sided in Americas favour.at the height of the IRA troubles when their terrorists fled to America & the UK applied for extradition US courts refused saying the IRA were "soldiers at war" & they wouldn't send "soldiers" back to a war zone.
photo
rabidrightwatch
Green lefty & active environmentalist
10:09 AM on 03/31/2012
Treaties of this type should be just, reciprocal, transparent & fair - the current extradition treaty is none of these.

I'm at a loss why the previous Government thought it a 'good thing' to sign such a one-sided treaty; it's clearly biased towards the US justice system, affecting citizens of the UK.

I think we all realise that successive Governments since 1945 have grovelled often and deeply, pandering to US 'requests' for all manner of things, but this treaty is simply beyond the pale.

I have no problem with an equal extradition treaty, when the US authorities present evidence in a UK court against a UK subject and, if found guilty, he/she is imprisoned in the UK.
I have equally no problem when the UK authorities present evidence in a US court against a US citizen, and if found guilty, he/she is imprisoned in the US.

That would be fair, equitable and understood by all - on whichever side of the pond you reside.

The current system reeks of sycophancy, deep grovelling and forelock tugging in a vain attempt to maintain the 'special relationship' - whatever that means?

Time for friends to treat each other equally, or am I just being altogether too sensible and idealistic again?
08:57 AM on 03/31/2012
There is no treaty. Uk to Us yes but US to UK no!??
07:59 AM on 03/31/2012
typical brit media putting their own "poor kitten" slant on criminals. what? thousands are being forced or is it been only 1 out of 3 in 10 yrs????? did they do it or not, yes. so be rid of them. why keep them because they are brits??? media forgets to tell you that a detention cell in US is better than what you find in middle class home in UK.
dont forget it's costing us taxpayer money to keep these criminals in the appeals system for years.
when is enough enough?
why you let the medias' opinion rule your better judgement?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
janno000
04:47 PM on 03/31/2012
Surely they are only criminals once they have been found guilty.
02:37 AM on 03/31/2012
Get rid of this treaty, one sided and unfair. This government is a joke, sad and weak. Puts others before its own citizens, they slap the wrist of the wrong ones and punish harshly or threaten to at least those that do minor crimes IF they are crimes at all
02:57 PM on 03/31/2012
This government didn't agree to the terms of the agreement,try labour!
10:06 PM on 03/30/2012
The cruelty and savagery here reminds me of punishments in the middle ages. Ill people made to go thousands of miles to possibly a country they have never been before. When they get there drag them through the streets at a horses tail so that you can all enjoy full sadism.
09:41 PM on 03/30/2012
no.one should be extradited to the us .they have the worse human rights in the world ,usa are the biggest threat to world peace
This comment has been removed.
08:59 PM on 03/30/2012
This man is no threat too anyone,let him go.
wes
08:52 PM on 03/30/2012
the sooner this is sorted out the better
06:15 PM on 03/30/2012
Time for a change, guy alledged to sell batteries for Iranian missiles, yanks want and get him, guy alledged to have mudered wife in S.A., cant be sent there, difference, get out your shade card.
05:20 PM on 03/30/2012
If the crime is done in our country then they must serve it in our country
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Snow Horton
01:09 AM on 03/31/2012
If only you could prosecute. Instead you allow your police officers to be jokes and you hand hold all of your criminals. Your country was never good at handling crime. That is why for 200 years you sent criminals to the colonies. Now you can just keep sending them here if we want them. You like how we clean up your messes because you have been letting us do it for more than 300 years.
02:24 AM on 03/31/2012
You love to slam british people with your generalisations dont you? How dare you put down britain when you have no clue about british people as evidenced by your lack of understanding of said people. Do no assume you know us because you watch the news or read some news reports. There is plenty i could say about the US that is negative but i do not, why? because i have known quite a few americans in my life and i have traveled in and around the US A LOT. There are some beautifull places there and some great people...
You blather on about US letting YOU clean up messes for more than 300 years? hmm..when america is only a little over 200 years old as a nation. Took a while for you to take places like california and texas away from Mexico. Read up on your own history before trying to hand other people garbage you say is fact.
Also, the fact you dont even know your own history casts doubt on the american schooling system which many people say is rather third rate in many parts of your OWN country, but does that mean all americans are stupid or all americans suffer from a bad education system? No of course not.
Do not make the mistake of thinking because we have a weak willed pathetic government right now that the people are weak and ineffectual, only weak and ineffectual people make THAT mistake.
photo
rabidrightwatch
Green lefty & active environmentalist
10:40 AM on 03/31/2012
Clearing us 'our messes for more than 300 years' since before 1710 - you really do live on another planet, don't you?

Explain and give me examples of how, precisely, the US cleared up our messes before you gained your independence in 1776??

There wasn't even a United States of America in 1712...

You don't even know your own history, let alone that of the UK - so you're on very shaky historical ground, to say nothing of your credibility...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mfa11e
Tell the truth ,regardless
04:52 PM on 03/30/2012
After the accident in Bhuppal ,India,US directors of the company flew over to be there for the investigation .They were arrested and bailed.They then fled the country back to the US Why doesnt the US return them to India so they be charged and if found guilty imprisoned?
photo
SecularAdvocate
Media Watcher
02:26 PM on 03/30/2012
As we're such good pals with the theocratic Saudi Arabia, maybe we should have a similar arrangement with them - then anyone who insults Islam can be extradited and beheaded, or whatever.

Obviously that wouldn't happen, because the views and mores and values and laws of Saudi Arabia don't apply in Britain. Unless you go there and break their laws, you wouldn't expect them to have jurisdiction over you.

So why are we allowing/licensing/aiding and abetting the US to impose their views and mores and values on British citizens?
01:22 PM on 03/30/2012
Do the crime, do the the time - but there is something very unsavoury and nasty about handing over one of your own to foreigners. It goes against the grain.
01:27 PM on 03/30/2012
the big problem is the fact that the American legal system has so many flaws. the biggest being the threat that if you plead guilty you get 2 years if found guilty 25 years.