I want to make it very clear that decisions about whether the matter is investigated are not made by Ministers; in this case, they are made by the Serious Fraud Office and the director of the Serious Fraud Office—an independent prosecuting service—who took the view that, because much of the evidence was in the United States and the alleged conspiracy was likely to have taken place there, if indeed it ever did, the matter would be better dealt with there. I remind him, too, that the district judge was also concerned that if there was an investigation here, it might in due course result in an abuse of process argument, because of the length of time such an investigation would take. It is appropriate to deal with the matter in the USA.
UK-US Extradition Treaty
Proceeding contribution from
Mike O'Brien
(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 c1435 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 21:33:12 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337063
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337063
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_337063