or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court refuses to make an order extraditing a man wanted in Russia in connection with a homicide involving the intentional causing of death to another person by stabbing finding that in light of long standing structural weaknesses and deficiencies in the Russian judicial and criminal justice systems there are substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that the respondent will not receive a fair trial to such an extent that he is likely to suffer a flagrant denial of justice in breach of Article 6 of the ECHR.
Criminal law – extradition – Russia – homicide involving the intentional causing of death to another person by stabbing – Extradition Act 1965 – s. 57 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act, 2005 – Article 12 of the European Convention on Extradition 1957 – s. 7 of the Extradition (Amendment) Act 1994 – s.20 of the Extradition (European Union Conventions) Act 2001) – correspondence and minimum gravity – whether purported expert is expert in Russian law – significant ongoing problem with judicial independence in Russia – conditions of detention in the Russia Federation – Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers in the Russian Federation – breaches of articles 3, 5, 6, and 13 ECHR – systemic problem with conditions in prisons and places of detention in the Russian Federation that had the potential to amount to inhumane and degrading treatment – real risk that the rights of a proposed extraditee guaranteed under article 3 of the ECHR would not be respected by the requesting state – prison conditions objections dismissed – absence of any right or guarantee that the respondent could take proceedings for the purpose of challenging the lawfulness of his detention in the requesting state – concern that the respondent will not receive a fair trial before an independent and impartial judiciary in breach of Article 6 ECHR – substantial grounds exist for believing that there is a real risk that the respondent will not receive a fair trial to such an extent that he is likely to suffer a flagrant denial of justice – absence of a prima facie case tending to show that the respondent committed the offence for which the requesting state seeks his extradition for the purposes of putting him on trial – objection based upon alleged interference with the right to respect for family life, as guaranteed under Article 8 ECHR dismissed – extradition refused.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.