Andrew Symeou - A glimmer of hope?

europa.eu
For some reason Tuesday's hearing has been delayed 7 weeks until 30th September. The prosecution have until the 2nd sept to receive the relevant information they require from Greece, then a week to put together a skeleton argument. After a further week Andrew's lawyers come up with a counter argument then the next free court date is 30th Sept. Although this seems to fly in the face of the requirements of The Commission's European Arrest Warrant whereby the UK is required to hand over the subject of the warrant without further ado, there is, apparently, a right to judicial review. Is there a glimmer of hope here for both Andrew and the sovereignty of the UK? Are some, in the UK, trying to wrestle back sovereign powers handed over to The European Commission?

From The European Union's web site.

The Tampere European Council called on the Member States to make the principle of mutual recognition the cornerstone of a true European law-enforcement area. The European arrest warrant proposed by the Commission is designed to replace the current extradition system by requiring each national judicial authority (the executing judicial authority) to recognise, ipso facto, and with a minimum of formalities, requests for the surrender of a person made by the judicial authority of another Member State (the issuing judicial authority).

 An article in the Daily Telegraph on 7th Feb 2002 by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, expains some of the background to the judicial review.

Coming into full force in 2004, it will enable a judge or prosecuting magistrate anywhere in the EU to order the automatic extradition of a British citizen on the basis of suspicion alone, without having to present the dossier of evidence required under the current system.

Simon Murphy, Labour leader, said the habeas corpus amendment would have caused the political deal for the warrant to fall apart.

He said suspects were adequately protected already under the terms of the warrant, which guaranteed the right to a judicial hearing in Britain before extradition and forbids states from violating "fundamental rights".

The Conservative Party voted against the amendment on the grounds that it would signal tacit support for the EU-wide warrant, which the Tories oppose as a quantum leap in judicial federalism.

Some other concerns were expressed in the article: 

AN arrest warrant covering 32 crimes in the European Union was approved by the European Parliament yesterday but it blocked a habeas corpus safeguard stopping abuse of the new system by over-zealous or corrupt magistrates.

Labour and Tory MEPs voted against an amendment by Sir Neil MacCormack, a Scottish nationalist MEP and a law professor, aimed at ensuring that Britons do not languish for months or years in foreign jails but several Euro-MPs defied party whips on a point of principle.

The amendment, supported by 155 Green and Liberal MEPs across the EU, proposed a "European habeas corpus Order" curbing excesses by judicial authorities and compelling them to bring suspects to trial within 110 days or free them.

Sir Neil said the EU had muddied the waters by equating allegations with hard proof. "They seem to think that prosecutors never make mistakes. Well they do. It's most urgent that we have remedies to prevent abuses of power," he said.

Dissenting MEPs were also angered by a "Christmas coup" on Dec 27 in which anti-terrorism measures were slipped through under a technical procedure, circumventing debate in Strasbourg and 15 national parliaments.

The Dec 27 text also infuriated civil liberties groups by extending terrorism to cover "passive" support for proscribed groups and stripping out the right to democratic protest and trade union activity.

And we should worry?


 

 

Posted on 14 Aug, 2008 by ethelred

Filed under Law


« Prev item • Next item »

Comments

No comments yet. You can be the first!

Leave comment