What is extradition?

Extradition is the formal process of one state allowing for an individual to be returned to another state for prosecution or punishment for crimes committed within that requesting country’s jurisdiction. With rare exceptions this is enforced by the existing agreements (treaties) between countries.

Extradition is becoming increasingly important given the recent widespread of transnational crime, as well as terrorism, drug trafficking, counterfeiting and even cybercrime.

How do extradition treaties operate?

All the recent bilateral extradition treaties are concluded in accordance with the principles of “double criminality” when a crime committed in one country is recognised as a crime in another country.

Cases where countries do not have an extradition treaty often become a focus of public attention, as was the case with a former US security officer Edward Snowden, who fled to Russia to avoid prosecution.

How do political relations between countries affect extradition?

Even when there is an extradition treaty in place between the countries, there are many factors that can be taken into consideration, such as the country’s law enforcement procedures, the existence of a bureaucratic red tape and trade and political relations between countries.

In the ongoing case against the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, Mr Assange sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in order to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he was charged with rape. However, Ecuador subsequently withdrew its protection and Mr Assange was arrested by the British authorities. The United States have charged Mr Assange for hacking the government system and consequently releasing classified documentation between 2010 and 2011.

According to the barrister Mark Simmers, who represents Mr Assange, the extradition bid is “a political attempt” by Donald Trump’s administration to “signal to journalists the consequences of publishing information” and that there was a “direct link” between Mr Trump’s election and the “reinvigoration” of the investigation. Prior to that, similar investigation, during the presidency of Barack Obama, led to no charges against Mr Assange.

It was further requested by Mr Assange’s defence lawyers to allow more time for gathering evidence, however, on Monday last week the request was dismissed by district judge Vanessa Baraitser. She told Assange his next case management hearing would take place on 19 December and the full hearing will indeed take place in February. Assange further told the judge he feels like fighting his case against the “superpower” with “unlimited resources”.

Amnesty International called on Britain last Monday to change its decision on Mr Assange’s extradition.

Massimo Moratti, deputy director of the human rights group for Europe, said: “The British authorities must acknowledge the real risks of serious human rights violations Julian Assange would face if sent to the USA.”

UK extradition law

Two weeks ago, in her speech, the Queen announced the Extradition (Provisional Arrest) Bill 2019-20. The legislation amends part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003, according to which law enforcement agencies are given broader powers in respect of arrest.

Part 2 deals with extradition to the countries which are not EU member states; law enforcement officers will be able to arrest individuals without obtaining an arrest warrant.

This new power will only apply where the request for an individual’s arrest for extradition purposes (for example, Interpol red notice) has been certified as having been issued by a specified country in relation to a serious offence.

Asylum law can be complex, and it is important you get a professional legal advice.  We can guide you through asylum application process and other immigration matters. Please contact LF Legal today on 0203 146 3549 / info@lflegal.co.uk


All our articles are intended for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. It is recommended that specific professional advice is sought before acting on any of the information provided.

Like this article? Share on


Related articles

Information about our own complaints process, raising concerns to the Legal Ombudsman and to us

We want to give you the best possible service. However, if at any point you become unhappy or concerned about the service we provided then you should inform us immediately, so that we can do our best to resolve the problem.

In the first instance it may be helpful to contact the person who is working on your case to discuss your concerns and we will do our best to resolve any issues at this stage. If you would like to make a formal complaint, then you can read our full complaints procedure here. Making a complaint will not affect how we handle your case.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority can help you if you are concerned about our behaviour. This could be for things like dishonesty, taking or losing your money or treating you unfairly because of your age, a disability or other characteristic. 

You can raise your concerns with the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

What do to if we cannot resolve your complaint

The Legal Ombudsman can help you if we are unable to resolve your complaint ourselves. They will look at your complaint independently and it will not affect how we handle your case.

Before accepting a complaint for investigation, the Legal Ombudsman will check that you have tried to resolve your complaint with us first. If you have, then you must take your complaint to the Legal Ombudsman:

  • Within six months of receiving our final response to your complaint; and,
  • Within one year of the date of the act or omission about which you are concerned; or
  • Within one year of you realising that there was a concern.


If you would like more information about the Legal Ombudsman, you can contact them at the following details:

 Contact details

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By closing this message, you consent to our cookies on this device in accordance with our cookie policy unless you have disabled them.