A high bar to reach: due process and extradition in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR and the United Kingdom

Un alto estándar a alcanzar: el debido proceso y la extradición en lajurisprudencia del TEDH y del Reino Unido

Abstract

This article examines the intricate relationship between due process rights under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and extradition procedures, with a focus on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the United Kingdom. Extradition balances state sovereignty, reciprocity, and comity against the need to prevent impunity. However, it often intersects with human rights issues, especially the right to a fair trial.

The ECtHR has clarified that Article 6 does not directly apply to extradition proceedings, viewing them as administrative rather than judicial in nature, and not as a means of determining guilt or civil rights. However, Article 6 acts as an extraterritorial safeguard, preventing extradition if there is a real risk of a "flagrant denial of justice" in the requesting state—requiring serious breaches that undermine the core of a fair trial, such as widespread judicial corruption, denial of legal representation, or the admission of torture-obtained evidence. 

Furthermore, diplomatic assurances from requesting states play a pivotal role in mitigating these risks. Still, their effectiveness depends on specificity, enforceability, and credibility, as illustrated in Japan v. Chappell and Wright versus failures in Bhandari v. Government of India. The article employs a dogmatic-legal methodology, analysing treaties, statutes, and case law to critique the high evidentiary burden placed on individuals and the imbalances in proceedings.

Ultimately, while this framework promotes international cooperation, it requires refinements to better protect rights amid evolving transnational challenges, ensuring that efficiency does not eclipse fairness.