header-logo header-logo

27 November 2014 / Thomas Garner
Issue: 7632 / Categories: Features , Public , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Behind closed doors?

garner

Thomas Garner examines the possibility of closed material procedures in extradition proceedings

On 5 November 2014 the Supreme Court gave judgment in the case of VB and others v The Government of Rwanda and others [2014] UKSC 59, [2014] All ER (D) 41 (Nov). Rwanda seeks the extradition of several individuals accused of genocide and related crimes. The judgment concerns closed material procedures in extradition hearings and touches upon the interplay between asylum and extradition.

The appellants argued that there are substantial grounds for believing that, there is a real risk that they will suffer a flagrantly unfair trial in Rwanda. As part of their case they wished to call a number of witnesses who are unwilling to give evidence if their evidence and identity was disclosed to the Government of Rwanda (GoR). Some witnesses said that they would only disclose their evidence to the judge.

The appellants invited the extradition judge to devise a “reverse closed material procedure” whereby the GoR would be prevented from seeing certain evidence. It was suggested that this could be achieved either through the appointment

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll