Let me try to explain, in the spirit of fraternity that always underpins our discussions. I speak without the expertise that my hon. and learned Friend brings to these legal matters—and I mean that truthfully.
My understanding is that forum is not part of the treaty, although it is mentioned in the Act. That means that if we wish to establish it in the treaty, although it may be acceptable to the other party to the treaty—that will depend on what we suggest—it will nevertheless require a renegotiation of the treaty. That is self-evident. I am not saying that it is not possible, but it will mean a renegotiation, and if it means a renegotiation with the United States, it will also mean a renegotiation of the same forum in the case of 20 other bilateral treaties. We will be prevented not just from ratifying this treaty, but from continuing without renegotiation of those other treaties. I do not consider it acceptable to block the treaty in that manner.
That is not to say, however—this might help my hon. and learned Friend—that we could not, outside the treaty, attempt to achieve some guidance on the procedures that we might use in an informal, or ““less formal than treaty””, manner in relation to such an important subject. That is why I have spoken in general terms to the United States Attorney General twice in the past week, and why my noble Friend the Attorney-General has spoken to him with a view to developing guidance on this subject.
I will not go into all the safeguards that already exist in relation to forum. At present, if there is a case to be held in this country it will take precedence over any request for extradition from the United States.
I am answering my hon. and learned Friend’s question at some length, because he clearly considers the issue important: so do I, so does the United States Attorney General and so does our Attorney-General. We are not saying that we will not deal with it, but I am asking for us to be able to deal with it outside the treaty, because we can then secure the benefits of the treaty as well as the benefits of clarification on guidance. I hope that that goes some way towards explaining the important issue that my hon. and learned Friend has raised.
Police and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Reid of Cardowan
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 6 November 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Police and Justice Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
451 c628-9 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:38:20 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358270
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358270
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_358270