“Tunisian Nizar Trabelsi extradited to US on terror charges”

October 3, 2013

BBC on October 3, 2013 released the following:

A Tunisian man jailed in Belgium in 2003 for planning to attack a Nato air base has been extradited to the US to face further charges.

Nizar Trabelsi faces several charges linked to the same plot including conspiring to kill Americans abroad, a US indictment shows.

Trabelsi, who used to play professional football in Germany, pleaded not guilty at a court in Washington DC.

The indictment says Trabelsi met al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden in 2001.

Trabelsi, now 43, was arrested in Belgium two days after the 11 September 2001 attacks on the US.

In 2003 he was convicted by a Belgian court of plotting to blow himself up at the Kleine Brogel base, which housed US soldiers.

He was imprisoned in Belgium until his extradition.

He now faces charges in the US of conspiring to kill Americans abroad, conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction and supporting a foreign terrorist organisation.

If convicted, he faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.

‘Trained for jihad’

Trabelsi’s extradition was requested by Washington in November 2008.

He had been indicted two years earlier by a grand jury in the US District Court in Washington DC.

According to the indictment, Trabelsi had prepared to travel to Afghanistan to train for jihad while living in Germany in 2000.

He met Bin Laden in Afghanistan in early 2001 and, at his direction, later spoke with al-Qaeda’s chief military planner Muhammed Atef, the indictment says.

Trabelsi had strongly resisted extradition to the US, fearing “inhumane” treatment.

His last appeal was rejected on 23 September by the Belgian Council of State, the country’s highest administrative court.

Justice Minister Annemie Turtelboom was quoted as saying by the Belga news agency that Brussels had received “assurances from US authorities” that he would be tried by a civil court rather than a military tribunal and would not be sentenced to death if convicted.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Belgium here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email:


“Spain Is Expected to Extradite Ex-Trader in JPMorgan Case”

October 2, 2013

The New York Times on October 1, 2013 released the following:

BY BEN PROTESS AND PETER LATTMAN

“Federal authorities expect that one of the former JPMorgan Chase employees facing criminal charges in connection with the bank’s multibillion-dollar trading loss in London will eventually be extradited to the United States, a senior prosecutor said on Tuesday.

The former trader, Javier Martin-Artajo, is living in Spain.

Although Mr. Martin-Artajo appears to be fighting extradition after briefly surrendering to police in Spain in August, Spanish authorities are expected to cooperate with prosecutors in New York.

“We have a pretty good extradition agreement with Spain,” Lorin L. Reisner, the chief of the criminal division at the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan, said on Tuesday. “I expect,” Mr. Reisner said, that Mr. Martin-Artajo “will return to the U.S. via the extradition process.”

Another former trader charged in the case, Julien Grout, could prove more elusive, Mr. Reisner said. After leaving JPMorgan’s London offices, Mr. Grout returned to his native France, which typically does not extradite its citizens.

“It’s more complicated,” Mr. Reisner said.

Mr. Reisner made his remarks at a conference in Midtown Manhattan on white-collar crime. The conference featured panels with leading government officials and criminal defense lawyers, as well as senior lawyers from the Securities and Exchange Commission, which under new leadership has tried to step up its enforcement. Some of those efforts are directed at JPMorgan, the nation’s biggest bank, which is the target of a wider legal crackdown.

The Justice Department is in settlement talks with JPMorgan and is seeking more than $11 billion from the bank over its sale of questionable mortgage securities. The bank also faces lingering investigations into its debt collection practices and its dealings with Bernard L. Madoff, the creator of a multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme.

The investigation into JPMorgan’s trading loss in London reached a peak in August when the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan, along with the F.B.I., announced charges against the two. At the heart of the case was the contention that the two had deliberately “manipulated and inflated the value” of a derivatives bet to hide hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

Both Mr. Martino-Artajo and Mr. Grout deny wrongdoing. Bruno Iksil, a third former trader, known as the “London Whale” for his role in the outsize derivatives trade, reached a nonprosecution deal with the government in exchange for testifying against his former colleagues.

Weeks after the charges, authorities took aim at JPMorgan for “lacking effective internal controls to detect” the traders’ conduct. The civil settlement — which resolved investigations from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve, the British Financial Services Authority and the S.E.C. — imposed $920 million in penalties on the bank. The deal also required the bank to admit wrongdoing.

At the legal industry conference on Tuesday, the co-head of the S.E.C’s enforcement unit trumpeted JPMorgan’s admission as evidence of a broader policy shift. For decades, the agency permitted defendants to settle cases without acknowledging their misconduct.

“We will demand admissions, and if the defendant isn’t prepared to agree, we will litigate at trial,” said Andrew Ceresney, the S.E.C. official, who gave the keynote address at the conference, run by the Practising Law Institute.

The change has already begun to “bear fruit,” Mr. Ceresney said, citing the JPMorgan case and a settlement with the hedge fund Harbinger Capital Partners. Like a guilty plea in a criminal case, an admission of wrongdoing is important to hold the defendant accountable and provides a form of catharsis to the investing public, he said.

Mr. Ceresney, a former defense lawyer at the law firm Debevoise & Plimpton, was recused from the JPMorgan case because he once defended the bank. He was hired by the agency’s new chairwoman, Mary Jo White, who also came from Debevoise. Both were federal prosecutors earlier in their careers.

Five months into the S.E.C. job, Mr. Ceresney argued that the new leadership had brought improvements to the agency, which was sharply criticized for missing financial frauds like the Madoff Ponzi scheme and failing to charge any top Wall Street executives tied to the financial crisis. “We wanted to bring the swagger back to the enforcement division, and I think we’re doing that,” he said.

The agency continues to face criticism. Even in the JPMorgan settlement, lawmakers and other critics questioned why the agency had charged the traders but declined to punish the bank’s leadership.

In one sign of change, however, the S.E.C. separately announced on Tuesday that it was paying more than $14 million to a whistle-blower who provided information that led to an enforcement action, by far the most significant payout in the two-year history of its whistle-blower office.

The agency did not identify the tipster or the case this person helped build. But under the whistle-blower program, created under the Dodd-Frank Act, tipsters can reap as much as 30 percent of the money the S.E.C. collects when imposing fines, suggesting that the relevant case was a big one.

The white-collar crime conference coincided with the first day of the government shutdown. Mr. Reisner, the federal prosecutor, described the shutdown as a “complete mess” for his already resource-constrained office.

He said that with 10 criminal trials under way in Federal District Court in Manhattan, he spent much of Monday seeking to prevent the government paralegals working on those cases from being furloughed.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Spain here.

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and France here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email:


“Mastros set free in France, but U.S. may still go after them”

June 6, 2013

The Seattle Times on June 5, 2013 released the following:

“Appeals court says the 88-year-old developer and his wife won’t be extradited to the U.S., where they are charged with bankruptcy fraud.

By Sanjay Bhatt
Seattle Times business reporter

Fugitive Seattle businessman Michael R. Mastro may well live out the rest of his life as a free man in the foothills of the French Alps.

A French appellate court Wednesday denied on humanitarian grounds the U.S. Department of Justice’s request to extradite Mastro and his wife, Linda, said Jim Frush, a Seattle attorney who represents the 88-year-old former real-estate magnate at the center of one of Western Washington’s biggest bankruptcies.

“I spoke with Mike, who was understandably very happy and relieved and indicated to me that he and Linda were about to leave for dinner,” he said.

The Mastros had been under electronic monitoring and restricted to their apartment after 6:30 at night as part of an earlier French order.

A federal grand jury indicted the Mastros on charges of bankruptcy fraud in August 2011, two months after the couple disappeared from sight.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Seattle declined to comment Wednesday on the French court’s ruling, saying only that it was examining its options, including a possible appeal.

It’s likely the Justice Department filed a “red notice” with Interpol, a global law-enforcement agency, that puts 190 countries on notice of the outstanding arrest warrant for the couple, said Douglas McNabb, an international criminal-defense lawyer in Washington, D.C.

If the Mastros try to leave France for any other country, they could be held there and possibly extradited to the United States to face the criminal charges, McNabb said.

But if the French court’s ruling isn’t appealed and the Mastros stay put in France, “the ballgame is over with,” he said.

The ruling of the appeals court in Chambéry can be appealed to the Council of State, France’s highest judicial body and roughly equivalent to the U.S. Supreme Court, said Juliet Sorensen, a law professor at Northwestern University who teaches international criminal law.

A treaty signed by the two nations in 1996 requires each to honor a request to extradite persons charged with certain offenses that are punishable in both countries.

But there are exceptions, including one that allows either nation to deny extradition if surrendering the person “might entail exceptionally serious consequences related to age or health,” according to the treaty.

The French appellate court ruled that extraditing the Mastros could have such consequences, and wasn’t persuaded by the Justice Department’s arguments to the contrary, Frush said.

Developer’s downfall

Mastro’s four-decade career as a prolific developer ended in a spectacular crash in 2009 when three banks forced him into bankruptcy court.

Mastro told the court he had nearly $587 million in liabilities, including more than $100 million he owed to individual investors and local groups such as the Italian Club of Seattle.

Against those liabilities, Mastro reported assets of $249 million, most of it debt others owed him.

State regulators also charged him with breaking the law by making false statements to “Friends & Family” investors and selling unregistered securities, charges that Mastro denied.

Mastro and his wife disappeared suddenly in June 2011 after they ignored a bankruptcy judge’s order to hand over two giant diamond rings worth more than $1.4 million.

They officially became fugitives a month later when warrants were signed for their arrest. But those warrants were for contempt of court, a civil violation, and experts said it would be difficult to extradite the Mastros without a criminal charge.

Then in August 2011, the U.S. Attorneys Office filed a sealed criminal complaint against the Mastros, charging them with bankruptcy fraud.

The complaint was made public last October after the Mastros were arrested near Lake Annecy, in the French Alps, where they had rented a succession of apartments.

The next month, a federal grand jury issued a superseding indictment containing 43 counts for bankruptcy fraud and money laundering.

The diamond rings, along with nearly 300 other pieces of jewelry, were seized in France in October after the Mastros were apprehended.

The collection is worth more than $3 million, according to the court-appointed trustee in Mastro’s bankruptcy case, James Rigby, who has recovered only a fraction of the money owed to creditors. The Mastros’ attorneys are fighting in court to stop the FBI from transferring some jewelry to the trustee.

The Mastros spent seven weeks in a French jail before a court placed them on supervised release with electronic monitoring pending an extradition proceeding.

Health concerns

In February, the three judges of the Court of Appeal in Chambéry ruled that the Mastros had been charged with offenses that were subject to extradition, but noted that lengthy incarceration likely would have serious consequences on their health.

The court’s 19-page ruling in February mentioned Mastro’s age and a serious head injury he suffered in a fall in Palm Desert, Calif., two years ago. The court also mentioned the “psychological frailty” of Linda Mastro, who is in her 60s, revealing that she attempted suicide shortly after the couple was arrested in France.

At a hearing in late May, the Justice Department’s representative told the French court that if the Mastros were extradited and convicted in the United States, they would not ask for more than two years in prison, Frush said Wednesday, citing information he received from Thomas Terrier, the Mastros’ attorney in France. Moreover, U.S. officials told the court the federal Bureau of Prisons was equipped to manage the Mastros’ health concerns, Frush said.

Terrier could not be immediately reached for comment.

Sorensen, the Northwestern University law professor, said the French government had discretion to extradite the Mastros despite the exception in the treaty, and said the Council of State had heard extradition appeals from the United States in the past.

Investor reaction

News of the French court’s ruling dismayed Kirkland resident Barry Bloch, one of the “Friends & Family” investors who loaned the developer money in return for pledges of interest payments.

“What a joke,” Bloch said after hearing from a reporter of the ruling.

Bloch and his wife, Teresa, loaned Mastro money and knew him for about four years before the developer’s fortunes unraveled.

“It didn’t bankrupt us, but it’s a sizable amount of money, and it’s disgusting that he isn’t brought to justice,” said Barry Bloch, 68.

He recalled an exchange with the developer at Mastro’s Seattle office on Rainier Avenue South as the real-estate market was imploding, but before the banks forced Mastro into bankruptcy court.

“I asked him how he sleeps at night, and he said, ‘I sleep like a baby.’ That spoke volumes,” Bloch said.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and France here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email:


“Iran envoy to Cyprus recalled after extradition to U.S.”

May 10, 2013

Reuters on May 9, 2013 released the following:

“(Reuters) – Iran has recalled its ambassador to Cyprus for consultations after an Iranian national was recently extradited from the island to the United States on suspicion of violating U.N. arms sanctions, Cyprus’s foreign minister said on Thursday.

“Only today … I received word from Nicosia that Iran has decided to recall its ambassador there for consultations. Why? Because an Iranian citizen was apprehended for trying to buy, to contravene the arms embargo against Iran,” Ioannis Kasoulides told a conference in Washington.

A diplomatic source in Nicosia said the Iranian was ordered to be extradited to the United States by a court “after exhaustion of all domestic legal remedies in Cyprus” about two weeks ago.

The source added that the nature of the alleged offence was “to buy and have delivered in Iran goods and material falling under the sanctions regime,” but would not go into any more detail.

Kasoulides, speaking to an audience at the Brookings Institution, later told Reuters Iran had attempted to apply political pressure on Nicosia to avert extradition. “In Cyprus in principle we follow the decision of the court.”

Cyprus, perched on the edge of the volatile Middle East, saw its worst peace-time disaster two years ago when a cargo of confiscated Iranian arms destined for Syria exploded, destroying its largest power station.

(Reporting By Anna Yukhananov, writing by Michele Kambas; editing by Mike Collett-White)”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Cyprus here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email:


“Doreen Alexander Extradited to the United States to Face Kidnapping Charges”

April 3, 2013

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on April 2, 2013 released the following story:

“WASHINGTON— Doreen Alexander has been extradited to the United States from Trinidad and Tobago to face charges related to her alleged role in the 2005 kidnapping of naturalized U.S. citizen Balram “Balo” Maharaj, announced Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Michael B. Steinbach, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Miami Field Office.

Alexander, 47, arrived in the United States on Sunday, March 31, 2013, and was arraigned yesterday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson in the District of Columbia. Alexander was charged in a two-count indictment filed in September 2010. If convicted, Alexander faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. She is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Alexander is the last charged co-conspirator involved in the alleged kidnapping of Maharaj, Alexander’s former boyfriend and father to one of her sons who died as a result of the kidnapping. The other 12 co-conspirators were previously extradited and prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

Alexander is alleged to have initiated the April 2005 kidnapping of Maharaj and provided information that allowed the kidnappers to identify, locate, and track Maharaj. Alexander allegedly alerted the kidnappers to Maharaj’s visits to Trinidad and Tobago; gave them information on his wealth, which was used to calculate the ransom; and reassured the kidnappers that they had the right man after the ransom negotiations went awry.

Valuable assistance was provided by the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs, which worked with its counterparts in Trinidad and Tobago to effect the extradition. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia has also provided significant assistance in this case.

The case was investigated by the FBI’s Miami Division Extraterritorial Squad with the assistance of the FBI’s Legal Attache’s Office in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago. Special assistance was further provided by the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service Anti-Kidnapping Squad and Homicide Bureau.

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Matthew Singer and Teresa Wallbaum of the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email:


“Former Iranian diplomat appeals against ruling for extradition to US”

October 31, 2012

Press TV on October 31, 2012 released the following updated story:

“Former Iranian Ambassador to Jordan Nosratollah Tajik has once again appealed against his extradition to the US on the grounds of his deteriorating health condition, Press TV reports.

Tajik was arrested in November 2006, accused of trying to buy night vision goggles from US mediators in violation of US exports rules. The former Iranian diplomat denies the allegations.

In April 2008, a British judge upheld a ruling that Tajik should be extradited to the US to face charges.

He is now attending a hearing at the High Court in London, awaiting the consideration of his long-standing claim that he has heart and other health problems.

“This is the hostility of the US government to [the] Iranian government and these international affairs… not very safe for me and it is against my human rights… one of the arguments is the health deterioration for the last four years,” he told Press TV.

    The former Iranian envoy had earlier said that he is too ill to travel and that he will face a show trial in the United States.

He appealed against the extradition decision first in 2008. The case is still before the court.

Iran has repeatedly called on the UK to release the former diplomat.

AR/PKH/HJL”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email:


Blocked Transfer Draws Attention to U.S.-U.K. Extradition Treaty

October 18, 2012

World Politics Review on October 18, 2012 released the following:

“By Catherine Cheney

On Tuesday, the British government announced that it would not extradite British hacker Gary McKinnon to the United States, marking the first time an extradition has been halted under the 2003 Extradition Act between the U.S. and the United Kingdom.

McKinnon, who is accused of serious crimes including hacking American military databases, has fought extradition for the past 10 years. But in light of new evidence about his health, British Home Secretary Theresa May, the government’s top authority on domestic affairs, cited McKinnon’s human rights as her main consideration. Extraditing McKinnon would put him at high risk of suicide, she said.

Trend Lines spoke to two experts about perceptions of the treaty, which has at times generated controversy, especially in the U.K.

“In the significant, overwhelming majority of extradition treaties, the requesting country is required to show probable cause that the individual probably committed the crime with which he has been charged,” explained Douglas McNabb, a senior principal for McNabb Associates and an expert in U.S. federal criminal law and international extradition.* “In the U.S.-U.K. treaty, the U.S. is not required to show probable cause. All the U.S. has to do is show a copy of the indictment and the arrest warrant and request that the individual be sent to the U.S.”

On the other hand, McNabb said, if the U.K. sought to have someone extradited from the U.S. to the U.K., the U.K. would be required to show probable cause.

According to McNabb, the treaty was negotiated because the Bush and Blair administrations “wanted to make it easier for the U.S. to have terrorists extradited from the U.K. to the U.S., so they provided for this expedited extradition process,” he said.

The fact that the significant majority of people extradited from the U.K. to the U.S. have been white-collar criminals, not terrorists, he added, has created a rift between the two states.

However, Ted Bromund, senior research fellow in Anglo-American relations at the Heritage Foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, argued that much of the controversy surrounding the agreement is because it is “misunderstood and mischaracterized” in the U.K.

“It is useful to bear one simple fact in mind: it was Britain that wanted the 2003 treaty, not the U.S.,” Bromund wrote in an email to Trend Lines. “When the U.S. delayed ratifying the treaty, Britain criticized [Washington]. Now many in Britain condemn the very treaty they wanted, which came as part of a long, and completely British, effort to reform their extradition system.”

Most extraditions to and from the U.S. are completely uncontroversial, Bromund explained. McNabb, too, referred to five terrorism suspects who were extradited from the U.K. to the U.S. earlier this month, noting that at the time, “we did not hear anything about this treaty being unfair.”

Bromund said that while the McKinnon case has generated controversy, he does not see any serious risk of fallout for the treaty.

“In the McKinnon case, the U.S. made a perfectly legal extradition request. Britain has (finally) decided not to extradite him, not because of anything wrong with the U.S. or its request, but because Mr. McKinnon is mentally ill,” he explained. “Britain has the right to decide that, so the subject is now closed.”

Both experts pointed to the news that the U.K. plans to create a forum bar as being more significant. In cases where prosecution would be possible both in the U.K. and abroad, the forum bar would enable British courts to block prosecution overseas.

“What upsets those in the U.K. is that if the majority of the criminal conduct occurred in the U.K., as compared to the U.S., then their thought is that these guys ought to be tried in the U.K.,” McNabb said.

“We have seen the U.S. take a very aggressive approach extraterritorially,” McNabb said. Over the past decade, some defendants have raised concerns, and attracted attention, for being “shipped off to the U.S.” for crimes they committed at home. Over time, McNabb said, these cases, combined with the perceived inequality of the treaty, put enough pressure on the British to make some changes.

Bromund expressed concern over the creation of the forum bar.

“Depending on how this is worded — and that is important — this could require British courts to discriminate in favor of British subjects, and thus against foreigners, when considering extradition requests,” he said. In the past, Bromund explained, everyone has been equal before the law in the U.K., with the nationality of the accused making no difference as far as extradition goes. The forum bar could change that, he said.

While the U.K. home secretary has called the 2003 deal “broadly sound,” introducing the forum bar would be a major change to the law, something both experts said is worth keeping an eye on.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
International Extradition Lawyers Videos:

International Extradition – When the FBI Seeks Extradition

International Extradition – Wire Transfer – Email – Telephone Call

————————————————————–

We previously discussed the extradition treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom here.

————————————————————–

To find additional global criminal news, please read The Global Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.

————————————————————–

International criminal defense questions, but want to be anonymous?

Free Skype Tel: +1.202.470.3427, OR

Free Skype call:

           Office Locations

Email: