Saturday, March 19, 2016

The extradition refusal Salah Abdeslam should have a limited effect – Le Figaro

FOCUS – Despite about official since Friday night, the extradition procedure is not longer in between European countries since 2002. The European arrest warrant which it substitutes makes it almost automatic transfer, even if additional time is not excluded.

This procedure is in every speech. The President Hollande hope that the response of the Belgian authorities to “extradition request” will be “as soon as possible.” Charles Michel, Belgian Prime Minister, for his side guaranteed that everything would be done to “ensure that extradition procedures are followed.” “We refuse at this stage, extradition”, has meanwhile said lawyer Salah Abdeslam, Mr. Sven Mary. The “extradition request” would be at the heart of the prosecution to wait after the arrest of Salah Abdeslam, who intends to reject. However, this procedure does not exist between European states since 2002, as emphasized several observers since Friday.

Until 2002, the transfer of persons arrested and prosecuted in one country by another passing by a request for extradition, as is always the case when non-European countries are involved. Under this procedure, the respective governments of the two countries directly involved. This is a diplomatic device: a country, with or without consideration, agreed to surrender the person continued to authorities of the requesting country to be prosecuted there. Agreements to this effect may exist. Conversely, many countries refuse to extradite their nationals.

But in 2002, the European arrest warrant is created. Its transposition into the laws of the various European countries can replace the diplomatic procedure for extradition from another, purely judicial and much faster. Governments of the two countries are involved. The floors of each state directly communicate , limiting diplomatic barriers. One then speaks more for extradition, but simply transfer -a term generically. The use of the term “extradition” in the case of Salah Abdeslam is probably explained by the known nature of the term and the fact that it combines all discount detainee from one country to another, even though ‘ it is legally incorrect.

This is a formidable weapon, which allows an almost automatic transfer , then we had before extradition, which is a procedure policy, “told AFP Pierre Chomé, criminal lawyer and law professor lawyer at the free University of Brussels.

the Parisian lawyer Florence Rouas-Elbazis specifies that the European arrest warrant has become a “routine” legal for Member States. In the case of Salah Abdeslam, must notify him that he is the subject of a European arrest warrant, which can be done by a bailiff in prison. If he then accepts the transfer, “it becomes a logistical issue” to return it to France. However, it has a possibility of appeal, but “essentially technical”. “It’s not because he refuses he will not be forgiven” says Florence Rouas Me-Elbazis, ‘but this may cause additional time “ . This period can vary between 60 and 90 days, said for his part the Minister of Justice Jean-Jacques Urvoas. In the absence of an appeal, the decision to go to France Salah Abdeslam be made within two months after his arrest, he said. Otherwise, it will take three months.

Saturday, the lawyer Salah Abdeslam confirmed that his client was opposed to the transfer. “We will first see whether the European arrest warrant is legal and then we’ll see”, he stressed, inter alia, precisely in reference to this specific procedure in Europe. Chomé for Pierre, most likely is that the Belgian justice “denounces” Salah Abdeslam to France for acts committed on Belgian territory , for example if it is suspected of shooting forces the order in Brussels. And that load France to teach this’ Belgian branch “, to go faster.

He stressed that in the case of Mehdi Nemmouche, accused of being the author of the bombing of the Jewish Museum in Brussels in May 2014, France had “had sympathy” to deliver to Belgium without dwelling on the crimes committed on French territory. These included, for example, the illegal possession of weapons at the time of his arrest in Marseilles.

LikeTweet

No comments:

Post a Comment