George Hepburne Scott discusses the death of s 2 arguments & the ‘transient state’ of European Arrest Warrants
- Post Goluchowski , a requesting judicial authority is able to add missing information to a deficient EAW so as to establish the validity of a warrant.
On 23 June 2017, the Divisional Court handed down judgment in Alexander v Public Prosecutor’s Office, Marseille District Court of First Instance, France; Benedetto v Court of Palermo, Italy [2017] EWHC 1392 (Admin), [2017] All ER (D) 76 (Jun). Up until this decision one of the most powerful arguments against any extradition was that the requesting state had failed to properly set out the conduct alleged on the part of the requested person that formed the basis of the extradition request (the s 2 argument). The Alexander decision massively expands any requesting states’ ability to ‘patch-up’ any inadequate extradition warrant with further information. This has arguably removed a very powerful protection of citizens facing extradition within the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) area.
Background
With the advent of the Extradition
