Police and Justice Bill

The debate has revealed a surprising degree of ad-hocery in our extradition arrangements with a great many countries, not just with the United States of America. Perhaps the point of principle on which Members need to dwell before the vote is whether the treaty should be wrecked on the basis of a wider flaw in many of our extradition treaties, especially in relation to forum and what should be done when a case could be tried in one or two jurisdictions, or worse, when somebody is judged not to have a case to answer in this country but is still subject to extradition requests—not only from the US but from many other countries. One of the things that we have achieved in the debate is the promise of guidance and, at least in relation to the United States, a clear set of criteria and a process whereby the decisions will be judged. I have to say that many of us would have preferred some judicial oversight of the process, but I have it in writing from the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, North (Joan Ryan) and we have heard today from the Home Secretary that to insert those clauses would mean that we made this country ridiculous in its conduct of international diplomacy and international agreements. We should not take that step this evening. There are many gains to be had from the treaty. The arguments about reciprocity that we discussed in previous debates do not carry the weight that Opposition Members gave them.