THE ROLE OF THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE
IN EXPORT EXTRADITION REQUESTS
1. JUDICIAL FORMULATION
1.1 The only formulation is contained in
R v The Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Frederick Thom
per Lord Justice Glidewell:
"(The DPP) is not to be regarded as the
prosecutor, but as a lawyer acting on behalf of a foreign client."
2. HISTORY
2.1 Historically, requesting states instructed
private firms of solicitors to act as their agents in extradition
proceedings. As various formal schemes of extradition evolved,
specific treaties provided for the Attorney General to act in
that capacity. As a matter of practice, long before the establishment
of the CPS, this function was devolved to the office of the DPP.
However, no specific provision for devolution was made until the
formal assignment by the Attorney General on 10 December 1996,
under Section 3(2)(g) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985.
3. CURRENT POSITION
3.1 The Casework Directorate in CPS Headquarters
deals with all export extradition work conducted by the CPS. The
work involves the following elements:
— preliminary advice to foreign states
considering extradition;
— representation for the requesting
state at remand, committal and appellate hearings by CPS lawyers
and by counsel where appropriate.
3.2 A number of the CPS lawyers have considerable
specialist expertise in this area and have developed an international
network of contacts at foreign justice agencies.
3.3 All advice and representation is provided
at CPS expense, since most extradition treaties and conventions
require that costs incurred in the territory of the requested
state by reason of extradition shall be borne by that state.
3.4 The CPS acts for the vast majority of
foreign states with whom the UK enjoys extradition relations,
although it is still open to any requesting state to instruct
at its own expense a private firm of solicitors to act on its
behalf.
4. THE PINOCHET
CASE
4.1 From 18 October 1998, the CPS acted
as the agent of the Kingdom of Spain in the conduct of its request
for the extradition of Senator Pinochet. This involved:
— the provision to the relevant Spanish
judicial authorities of detailed oral and written advice concerning
English extradition procedures and the content of the formal request
for extradition; on three occasions this involved a CPS lawyer
and counsel travelling to Madrid;
— the conduct of those extradition
proceedings before the English courts, both by CPS lawyers and
by counsel.
4.2 At all times the CPS acted on the instructions
of the Kingdom of Spain. At no time did the CPS have any involvement
with the investigation of the allegations against Senator Pinochet,
other than to ascertain that the request for extradition was founded
on the basis of a valid prosecution.
4.3 The CPS—other lawyers and staff—also
had to consider whether the evidence presented to it by solicitors
acting for alleged victims might found a case in England and Wales.
The police had to decide whether to mount their own investigations.
We advised that the evidence presented did not amount to such
a case. The decision whether to mount an investigation was postponed
until the Home Secretary's decision, by which time it was clear
that whatever evidence might be obtained by the police Senator
Pinochet's health was such that he could not be tried in England
or Wales.
| 
