A European arrest warrant had sufficiently particularised a convicted requested person’s involvement in a conspiracy to traffic women into prostitution in Italy, the demands in respect of conviction warrants being less onerous than those in relation to accusation warrants. An ECHR art.3 argument based on Italian prison conditions had been foreclosed by the decision in Elashmawy v Italy [2015] EWHC 28 (Admin).
CONSPIRACY CONVICTIONS EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANTS EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1950 art.3 EXTRADITION EXTRADITION OFFENCES HUMAN RIGHTS INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT PARTICULARS PRISON CONDITIONS s.22 s.30 s.30(2) SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 s.10
Alleged offences relating to prostitution and people trafficking as specified in a European arrest warrant for which the appellant’s extradition to Lithuania was sought amounted to extradition offences by virtue of the Extradition Act 2003 s.64(3). All the conditions of s.64(3) had been met, notably as the conduct alleged in the warrant had partly occurred in Lithuania and would constitute one or more offences under English law.
EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANTS EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1950 art.7 EXTRADITION EXTRADITION ACT 2003 s.64 EXTRADITION OFFENCES EXTRADITION ORDERS NO PUNISHMENT WITHOUT LAW OFFENCES SPECIFIED IN ARREST WARRANT AMOUNTING TO EXTRADITION OFFENCES BY VIRTUE OF S.64(3) EXTRADITION ACT 2003 Part 1 PART OF CONDUCT OCCURRING IN REQUESTING STATE PROSTITUTION s.10 s.52 s.53 s.59(3) s.60 s.60(1) s.60(2) s.64(2) s.64(3) s.64(4) SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.59
Please use the form below to make contact. Your email will be responded to promptly (we endeavour to respond to all email enquiries within one hour). Alternatively, you can call Stephen's firm, Twelve Tabulae Limited, on +44 (0) 203 846 5801.