British Justice for British Citizens

No extradition without evidence being tested in UK courts.

No extradition for things that are not offences under UK law.

No extradition for offences that took place in the UK (USA wire transfer, computer, hacking, antiques purchases, etc).

This should apply equally within the EU and outside. Should apply even if a Eurpean Arrest Warrant has been issued.

Extradition should also be subject to a UK Public Interest test and the Home Secretary should have the right (rarely used) to quash it.

Why is this idea important?

No extradition without evidence being tested in UK courts.

No extradition for things that are not offences under UK law.

No extradition for offences that took place in the UK (USA wire transfer, computer, hacking, antiques purchases, etc).

This should apply equally within the EU and outside. Should apply even if a Eurpean Arrest Warrant has been issued.

Extradition should also be subject to a UK Public Interest test and the Home Secretary should have the right (rarely used) to quash it.

Withdraw from unfair extradition treaties

Withdraw from extradition treaties with the USA. Current arrangements are demonstrably and grossly biased in favour of the US. The treatment of the 'NatWest Three' underlines the point. UK citizens should always be fairly treated. 

Withdraw from the EU arrest warrant scheme until such time as proper arrangements have been put in place to ensure that British citizens are not at risk of being arrested abroad as a consequence of mistaken identity, and we are satisfied that there is no risk of miscarriages of justice in respect of those who may be arrested under these warrants.

 

Why is this idea important?

Withdraw from extradition treaties with the USA. Current arrangements are demonstrably and grossly biased in favour of the US. The treatment of the 'NatWest Three' underlines the point. UK citizens should always be fairly treated. 

Withdraw from the EU arrest warrant scheme until such time as proper arrangements have been put in place to ensure that British citizens are not at risk of being arrested abroad as a consequence of mistaken identity, and we are satisfied that there is no risk of miscarriages of justice in respect of those who may be arrested under these warrants.

 

Extradition treaties

Extradition treaty to USA and elsewhere – this treaty HAS to be re-thought as currently we kow tow to foreign governments     who have no idea of what true justice means – we should be ashamed that we extradite our citizens to regimes, including USA where justice is not dispensed in an acceptable manner – the previous government should have been totally ashamed of its betrayal of the people of this country

Why is this idea important?

Extradition treaty to USA and elsewhere – this treaty HAS to be re-thought as currently we kow tow to foreign governments     who have no idea of what true justice means – we should be ashamed that we extradite our citizens to regimes, including USA where justice is not dispensed in an acceptable manner – the previous government should have been totally ashamed of its betrayal of the people of this country

THE EXTRADITION TREATY WITH THE US of A.

The extradition treaty with the USA is possibly the most unfair, unjust and sycophantic piece of legislation that any UK government has passed in a long, long time. It needs to be abolished immediately.

We need to introduce a new extradition treaty with the USA which is fair to the British people. Which is just to the British people and Which defends the British people their liberty and their interests.

We need a new treaty with the USA which requires the US authorities to put all the evidence at their disposal in front of the British court. This will allow the accused to see the evidence and defend him or herself accordingly.  Only crimes which are a crime in the UK will be considered by the court. Nothing else.

Why is this idea important?

The extradition treaty with the USA is possibly the most unfair, unjust and sycophantic piece of legislation that any UK government has passed in a long, long time. It needs to be abolished immediately.

We need to introduce a new extradition treaty with the USA which is fair to the British people. Which is just to the British people and Which defends the British people their liberty and their interests.

We need a new treaty with the USA which requires the US authorities to put all the evidence at their disposal in front of the British court. This will allow the accused to see the evidence and defend him or herself accordingly.  Only crimes which are a crime in the UK will be considered by the court. Nothing else.

Extradition treaty with USA

Please either renogotiate the extradition treaty so the same rules apply to both US and UK citizens or cancel the treaty which is unfair to UK citizens. The treaty was originally intended to handle terrorists but has been misused by the US authorities.

Why is this idea important?

Please either renogotiate the extradition treaty so the same rules apply to both US and UK citizens or cancel the treaty which is unfair to UK citizens. The treaty was originally intended to handle terrorists but has been misused by the US authorities.

repeal the extradition treaty with the US

The last Government told us that it needed a new extradition treaty with the US in order to combat terrorism.  We were told that we were passing it first, and that the Americans would introduce match legislation immediately thereafter.  This is clearly all based on a lie.  The ASmericans did not pass the matching legislation, so they clearly consider it unimportant.  It has not been used to extradite any terrorists – as far as I know.  All that it has been used for it to persue businessmen who have (the Americans claim) offended their laws (but perhaps not English law).

Why is this idea important?

The last Government told us that it needed a new extradition treaty with the US in order to combat terrorism.  We were told that we were passing it first, and that the Americans would introduce match legislation immediately thereafter.  This is clearly all based on a lie.  The ASmericans did not pass the matching legislation, so they clearly consider it unimportant.  It has not been used to extradite any terrorists – as far as I know.  All that it has been used for it to persue businessmen who have (the Americans claim) offended their laws (but perhaps not English law).

Suspend or repeal the Extradition Act 2003 immediately.

 

The Extradition Act 2003 poses a very serious threat to hundreds of British Citizens who will continue to be denied justice if this rotten piece of legislation is allowed to continue unhampered.

It beggars belief that the Extradition Act was ever passed by Labour and one can only assume that ministers made no attempt to read it or understand the consequences.

The Extradition Act requires judges to grant any extradition request without scrutinising the evidence (or lack of it) and they are expressly prevented from making any judgement on whether or not the person is likely to get a fair trial.  Fair trials are not a foregone conclusion in countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, Azerbaijan, Sierra Leone, Russia, Serbia, Liberia et al, and it is shocking to realise that this Act is not restricted to extradition to EU countries and the US but includes all the afore-mentioned states and more.

The Extradition Act should be suspended immediately and extradition requests properly scrutinised on a case-by-case basis until a more thoughtful and competent piece of legislation can be produced that protects our basic right to a fair trial.

Why is this idea important?

 

The Extradition Act 2003 poses a very serious threat to hundreds of British Citizens who will continue to be denied justice if this rotten piece of legislation is allowed to continue unhampered.

It beggars belief that the Extradition Act was ever passed by Labour and one can only assume that ministers made no attempt to read it or understand the consequences.

The Extradition Act requires judges to grant any extradition request without scrutinising the evidence (or lack of it) and they are expressly prevented from making any judgement on whether or not the person is likely to get a fair trial.  Fair trials are not a foregone conclusion in countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, Azerbaijan, Sierra Leone, Russia, Serbia, Liberia et al, and it is shocking to realise that this Act is not restricted to extradition to EU countries and the US but includes all the afore-mentioned states and more.

The Extradition Act should be suspended immediately and extradition requests properly scrutinised on a case-by-case basis until a more thoughtful and competent piece of legislation can be produced that protects our basic right to a fair trial.

The Extradition Act 2003

Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It came into force on 1 January 2004 and all import and export extradition requests submitted or received from this date are covered by the Act. It concerns itself with extradition to and from the UK in respect of all territories and in particular implements into UK law the US-UK Extradition Treaty 2003.

Why is this idea important?

Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It came into force on 1 January 2004 and all import and export extradition requests submitted or received from this date are covered by the Act. It concerns itself with extradition to and from the UK in respect of all territories and in particular implements into UK law the US-UK Extradition Treaty 2003.

Repeal extradition legislation

Repeal the Extradition Act that enables other countries with lesser standards of justice to seek and obtain the extradition of British citizens without British judicial scrutiny.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the Extradition Act that enables other countries with lesser standards of justice to seek and obtain the extradition of British citizens without British judicial scrutiny.

Extradite Al-quaeda members wanted in other countries.

I propose that if a person was not born in Britain (or a linked country that accepts Queen Elizabeth as its monarch) and is wanted by another country to put them on trial for terrorist-related offenses we should send them, especially if they were born in the country that is requesting them back.

The British people, while not callous, believe that the millions we spend mollycoddling foreign prisoners is wrong when it could be spent on more worthy causes like funding the NHS, the salaries of public sector workers, paying for cancer drugs or paying off our national debt.

The costs of having each foreign terror suspect in Britain is astronomical, as often the state is paying for their housing, legal aid and food and clothing. The process drags on for years in the courts with the European Court of human rights getting involved, making the process even longer and more costly to Britain.

We should also investigate whether or not non-British born Al-queda sympathisers should be deported back to their countries of origin.

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

I propose that if a person was not born in Britain (or a linked country that accepts Queen Elizabeth as its monarch) and is wanted by another country to put them on trial for terrorist-related offenses we should send them, especially if they were born in the country that is requesting them back.

The British people, while not callous, believe that the millions we spend mollycoddling foreign prisoners is wrong when it could be spent on more worthy causes like funding the NHS, the salaries of public sector workers, paying for cancer drugs or paying off our national debt.

The costs of having each foreign terror suspect in Britain is astronomical, as often the state is paying for their housing, legal aid and food and clothing. The process drags on for years in the courts with the European Court of human rights getting involved, making the process even longer and more costly to Britain.

We should also investigate whether or not non-British born Al-queda sympathisers should be deported back to their countries of origin.

 

 

 

American misuse of deportation agreement

Generally Americans attempt to export their laws to other countries.   An example of this is that I refused to sign paperwork which would have caused me to agree to comply with their Patriots Act.  

It would seem that the last government signed a onesided agreement which allows for the deportation of UK persons/residents to America, when the actions of these persons are not, in the UK, considered to be illegal.   I am under the impression that the basis of this agreement was to ensure terrorists were promptly deported on a reciprocal basis, whereas it would seem that the Americans have used it otherwise.   

These arrangements must be undone and this government should not be cowed by American displeasure. 

Why is this idea important?

Generally Americans attempt to export their laws to other countries.   An example of this is that I refused to sign paperwork which would have caused me to agree to comply with their Patriots Act.  

It would seem that the last government signed a onesided agreement which allows for the deportation of UK persons/residents to America, when the actions of these persons are not, in the UK, considered to be illegal.   I am under the impression that the basis of this agreement was to ensure terrorists were promptly deported on a reciprocal basis, whereas it would seem that the Americans have used it otherwise.   

These arrangements must be undone and this government should not be cowed by American displeasure. 

One way extradition treaty to US, no evidence required.

In extradition cases, sufficient evidence must be shown for the trial of UK citizens on foreign soil, especially relating to the particular need for the suspect to be trialed in the other country.

eg. The case of Gary McKinnon.
 

Why is this idea important?

In extradition cases, sufficient evidence must be shown for the trial of UK citizens on foreign soil, especially relating to the particular need for the suspect to be trialed in the other country.

eg. The case of Gary McKinnon.
 

Erosion of Liberty by European Court of Human Rights

We must disassociate ourselves from interference by Europe on matters that represent a threat to British citizens. The European Court of Human Rights seeks to protect known criminals and terrorists and their "rights", whilst wholly ignoring the rights of the people of Britain to safety in their everyday lives. What authority does Europe have over an agreement between British courts and the USA? Britain needs to remind those who repeatedly play the "human rights" card that acceptance of responsibility comes before rights.

Interference in the extradition of Abu Hamza al-Masri to the USA is a good example of how the European Court of Human Rights puts itself and its ideas above the laws of Britain and the USA.

Britain has fought long and often for its civil liberties and has frequently demonstrated its responsibilities that allow us to claim our own rights. No person, group or court can be allowed to erode our right to safety so that one, two or even a hundred individuals can put their frequently absurd claims to "rights" before the rights of a whole nation.

Why is this idea important?

We must disassociate ourselves from interference by Europe on matters that represent a threat to British citizens. The European Court of Human Rights seeks to protect known criminals and terrorists and their "rights", whilst wholly ignoring the rights of the people of Britain to safety in their everyday lives. What authority does Europe have over an agreement between British courts and the USA? Britain needs to remind those who repeatedly play the "human rights" card that acceptance of responsibility comes before rights.

Interference in the extradition of Abu Hamza al-Masri to the USA is a good example of how the European Court of Human Rights puts itself and its ideas above the laws of Britain and the USA.

Britain has fought long and often for its civil liberties and has frequently demonstrated its responsibilities that allow us to claim our own rights. No person, group or court can be allowed to erode our right to safety so that one, two or even a hundred individuals can put their frequently absurd claims to "rights" before the rights of a whole nation.

Amend or Repeal the Extradition Treaty with the USA

The Extradition Treaty with the USA is plainly unbalanced.  Our courts must comply with a demand from the USA with no good grounds demonstrated, whereas we must provide more substantial grounds to extradite from the USA.

Repeal the treaty so that each country must provide proof of guilt to make the extradition more than a formality.

Why is this idea important?

The Extradition Treaty with the USA is plainly unbalanced.  Our courts must comply with a demand from the USA with no good grounds demonstrated, whereas we must provide more substantial grounds to extradite from the USA.

Repeal the treaty so that each country must provide proof of guilt to make the extradition more than a formality.

call for ammendment of human rights act

the human rights act should be ammended so that it can not be abused by criminals and chancers to the detriment of the tax payer and the rest of society.

Human rights should be for UK Citizens- newcomers should have lived lawfully in the country for at least 5 years before it applies to them.

it should not be impossible to deport foreign offenders because they may suffer if they are returned to their country of origin- their rights should weigh less than they risk they pose to society in the UK. The UK Government has a duty of care to its citizens but they seem to be more concerned with letting every serious offender stay in the country and continue committing offences. Also this is an open invitation for foreigners to committ offences to get the right to live in the UK permanently 

Why is this idea important?

the human rights act should be ammended so that it can not be abused by criminals and chancers to the detriment of the tax payer and the rest of society.

Human rights should be for UK Citizens- newcomers should have lived lawfully in the country for at least 5 years before it applies to them.

it should not be impossible to deport foreign offenders because they may suffer if they are returned to their country of origin- their rights should weigh less than they risk they pose to society in the UK. The UK Government has a duty of care to its citizens but they seem to be more concerned with letting every serious offender stay in the country and continue committing offences. Also this is an open invitation for foreigners to committ offences to get the right to live in the UK permanently 

Abrogate from US extradition treaty

What is this for, why do we need it? Abrogate from our one-sided extradition treaty with the US that not only allows them to extradite a UK citizen on a lower evidence threshold than for the UK to extradite from the US but which also the US have not even ratified their side!

Why is this idea important?

What is this for, why do we need it? Abrogate from our one-sided extradition treaty with the US that not only allows them to extradite a UK citizen on a lower evidence threshold than for the UK to extradite from the US but which also the US have not even ratified their side!

Repeal Extradition to USA arrangements

Repeal the arrangements for extradition of British citizens to the USA. Currently the Americam authorities are not required to present evidence and justify their request to a court in this country.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the arrangements for extradition of British citizens to the USA. Currently the Americam authorities are not required to present evidence and justify their request to a court in this country.

extradition to U.S.A.

This extradition treaty with the U.S.A. is a totally inequable and iniquitous piece of legislation which appears to be solely designed for the benefit of the US, in part to carry out vendettas against British nationals who have offended the US in some way(in some cases minor offences). This appears to be particularly offensive in the case of a British national who has caused the US Defence department embarrassment. This would appear to be a one-sided arrangement and as such should be scrapped.

Why is this idea important?

This extradition treaty with the U.S.A. is a totally inequable and iniquitous piece of legislation which appears to be solely designed for the benefit of the US, in part to carry out vendettas against British nationals who have offended the US in some way(in some cases minor offences). This appears to be particularly offensive in the case of a British national who has caused the US Defence department embarrassment. This would appear to be a one-sided arrangement and as such should be scrapped.

Repeal the one-sided extradition treaty with the USA

The extradition treaty (2004) with the USA is one-sided and grossly unfair.

It allows the US to extradite UK citizens for offences against US law even though the offence was committed in the UK, by a person living and working in the here ( e.g. the Natwest Three,Gary McKinnon), while there is no reciprocal right to extradite US citizens.
There is also a problem with the level of prima facie evidence (proof) being less to extradite UK citizens to the US than vice-versa.

The current legislation is indefensible and should be repealed immediately.

Why is this idea important?

The extradition treaty (2004) with the USA is one-sided and grossly unfair.

It allows the US to extradite UK citizens for offences against US law even though the offence was committed in the UK, by a person living and working in the here ( e.g. the Natwest Three,Gary McKinnon), while there is no reciprocal right to extradite US citizens.
There is also a problem with the level of prima facie evidence (proof) being less to extradite UK citizens to the US than vice-versa.

The current legislation is indefensible and should be repealed immediately.

Extradition Treaty with USA

The current extradition arrangements with the USA should be renogiated such that the imbalance in favour of the USA should be addressed. Better still since the USA does not honour international law the extradition agreement should be cancelled

Why is this idea important?

The current extradition arrangements with the USA should be renogiated such that the imbalance in favour of the USA should be addressed. Better still since the USA does not honour international law the extradition agreement should be cancelled

The Repeal of our Extradition Treaties with the United States

The Blair created Extradition Treaty with the US, which was agreed and rubber stamped without the executives approval, needs to be repealed. It needs to be repealed because the law does not allow for the proper presentation of evidence by the United States government in a case in which an individual is being sought after for extradition by the US government. The US government has been given the right to extradite a UK citizen without having to present a case to a sovereign British court. This is an infringement of our sovereignty and such a treaty is a breach of human rights and contrary to European as well as British law. The legitimacy of this law is in doubt. 

Why is this idea important?

The Blair created Extradition Treaty with the US, which was agreed and rubber stamped without the executives approval, needs to be repealed. It needs to be repealed because the law does not allow for the proper presentation of evidence by the United States government in a case in which an individual is being sought after for extradition by the US government. The US government has been given the right to extradite a UK citizen without having to present a case to a sovereign British court. This is an infringement of our sovereignty and such a treaty is a breach of human rights and contrary to European as well as British law. The legitimacy of this law is in doubt.