Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It should be noted that a lot of British people are sick and tired of the 2003 US/UK Extradition Treaty, which is extremely unpopular and which extradites people from the Britain who have never set foot in the US, who have committed no crimes under our laws, and if they have committed crimes have in many cases committed them on British soil. America does not extradite people who are American Citizens who have committed crimes on American soil, so why should we extradite British Citizens who committed crimes on British Soil. The levels of evidence needed to extradite a British person are far lower than an American, and the US often doesn't even give details of what people are being charged with. The whole thing is a disgrace, and while America ponders the future of Amanda Knox, we should remember the British people caught in a one way extradition treaty with the US.
It's also interesting to note is that prior to 9/11 when we were fighting a war against terror in relation to the IRA, the US refused to extradite any IRA Terrorists to the UK claiming their acts were political.
Then after 9/11 the US quickly pressures the UK to sign a new treaty in order that terrorists be extradited to the US, whilst the US also starts ignoring extradition treaties altogether in respect of extraordinary rendition, and also starts ignoring basic principles such as due process in relation to those imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Telegraph
Lawyers from a group of FTSE 100 companies are planning to meet the Government to express worries over "lopsided" extradition arrangements. For if it were the other way round, and the accused were US citizens, living in America, who had worked for a New York bank, there would be no chance of them being compelled to face a trial here.
For a start, it's hard to imagine that Britain would even bother asking. But in any event it wouldn't happen, because our extradition deal with the US offers far greater protection to Americans than it does to Britons.
Under the 2003 Extradition Act, which we were led to believe was brought in to clamp down on international terrorism, the US is not required to produce prima facie evidence that a crime has been committed by those whom it seeks to extradite.
By contrast, the UK cannot similarly reel in Americans, because the US has yet to ratify the measures. As Sir Menzies Campbell, the acting Liberal Democrat leader, pointed out: "The [UK] Government has been caught out here, because it entered into an agreement with the United States, a treaty, which gives British citizens poorer rights than American citizens."
Seeking to justify the UK Government's acquiescence to an extension of America's extra-territorial reach, a Home Office spokesman said: "The United States is a trusted extradition partner with a mature legal system and it guarantees appropriate safeguards within its domestic courts."
Is this the same US judicial set-up, I wonder, that did so much to frustrate Britain's efforts to repatriate alleged IRA killers from America in the 1970s and 1980s? Do you recall the likes of Desmond Mackin, Peter McMullen and Liam Quinn, all wanted by Britain to face charges of terrorist atrocities? I do, and I can tell you what became of them: US courts turned down extradition orders on all three.
Yes, for years, while America's Noraid was funding the IRA's murder campaign, the US judiciary was helping to protect its perpetrators from facing justice. Turning a blind eye to accusations of terror was politically acceptable, it seemed, as long as it wasn't happening inside the US.
Then came 9/11, and the game changed overnight. Suddenly America had a ringside seat at terrorism's horror show. In Washington, transatlantic extraditions were very quickly restored to the diplomatic menu.
Has Gary Mckinnon been extradited yet? I'm sorry but, he hacked the Pentagon and NASA and now he's worried about extradition. Here's an idea. DON'T HACK IT THEN??!!
Not going to go into the IRA gubbins a i don't know too much about that.
Has Gary Mckinnon been extradited yet? I'm sorry but, he hacked the Pentagon and NASA and now he's worried about extradition. Here's an idea. DON'T HACK IT THEN??!!
Not going to go into the IRA gubbins a i don't know too much about that.
McKinnon was indeed a hacker but he is also a British Citizen and carried out his crime on British soil, he should therefore be tried in a British Court.
I am not saying people should not be punished, I am saying when a crime is committed in Britain by a British Citizens it should be British Courts that pass judgement. If the Pentagon and NASA wish to prosecute McKinnon they are more than welcome to do so through the British Courts.
I am not appealing to the Americans to scrap the agreement, indeed they are quite content to keep the current one sided agreement and I am more than aware than Tony Blair signed a one sided agreement in 2003. What I am saying is that this agreement needs to be scrapped and either replaced with a new agreement or even no agreement at all which would be preferable to this current mess.
Why the law needs to change
1. Someone should not be extradited to another country for actions that are not criminal in the UK. The US would not extradite an American Citizen for something that is not illegal in the US, so why not the other way around in terms of extradition.
2. A basic case (prima facie) should be made to a British court before someone can be sent abroad to face trial in another country. Prima Facie evidence must be presented to an American Court to secure any extradition from the US to the UK of an American Citizen, so why not the other way around.
3. If a significant part of the conduct that led to the alleged crime took place in the UK, then a British court should be able to decide if it is in the interests of justice to extradite. If a crime is committed on US soil by a US Citizen there would never be any question of extradition, such a case would automatically go before US Courts and not a British Court, so again why not the same the other way around.
Yes. Scrap it immediately. Britons should not be extradited to the US because they have broken a law that might exist in the US, but not necessarily here, and either way, if they have not broken a law on US soil, they have no business being sentenced for a crime there.
Its definately an unbalanced agreeement but its not going anywhere.
The Labour Party is currently reexamining it's support for the Treaty, which is now more closely linked with the politics of New Labour under Tony Blair than with the current Labour Party. Whilst those on the Conservative Right and party's such as UKIP have both voiced concern over the current treaty. So there is hope that it will be addressed, and this hope becomes ever stronger with each controversial case.
Your government is allowing the USA to take out the garbage. They are sending the terrorists that they don't want to deal with and letting the USA pick up the high expense of the trial.
Your government is allowing the USA to take out the garbage. They are sending the terrorists that they don't want to deal with and letting the USA pick up the high expense of the trial.
That may well have been the intention to take on terrorists in your perceived role as World Police but it is not what has been happening in reality.
Your government is allowing the USA to take out the garbage. They are sending the terrorists that they don't want to deal with and letting the USA pick up the high expense of the trial.
I suggest you read and listen to the posts I have just posted. Very few are terrorist related and most people in Britain are sick and tired of this extradition treaty. If America wants to keep extraditing I suggest they do so on a level playing field between the two nations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
