I do not question for one second the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s commitment on these issues. I was asked to accept a blanket assurance about the attitude of Opposition Members on these matters, and I have explained why I cannot do so.
Concerns have been expressed in the debate about the reciprocity of the treaty. I accept that the evidentiary thresholds in two different legal jurisdictions will not be exactly identical, but people are worried that we have lowered the threshold and that it is not now possible to challenge prima facie evidence. Reference has been made to article 8 of the treaty, and to the forum clause. That provision relates to people who have never left the UK and to evidence that has been found only in the UK. The evidence that the US is relying on in the NatWest three case was obtained as a result of a search carried out in the UK, so why are the people involved not being charged in the UK?
UK-US Extradition Treaty
Proceeding contribution from
Sadiq Khan
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 12 July 2006.
It occurred during Adjournment debate
and
Emergency debate on UK-US Extradition Treaty.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
448 c1430 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 00:12:52 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337036
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337036
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337036