Proceeding contribution from Conor Burns (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 5 December 2011. It occurred during Backbench debate on UK Extradition Arrangements.
UK Extradition Arrangements
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton (Mr Raab) on securing this debate. He has shown his usual tenacity and principle, which are becoming his hallmark. It is a bit of a relief, on this one-line Whip, to escape the burdens of PPS-dom and speak out on something about which I have felt passionately for some time. I have recently written a pamphlet entitled ““The case against the European arrest warrant””, which will be published shortly. I will not trespass on my time by speaking a lot about the United States, except to place on the record my support and sympathy for Gary McKinnon and his family, who in my judgement have been badly treated. The public share that view strongly. I will concentrate on the European arrest warrant. My hon. Friend's motion is moderate in calling on the Government"““to reform the UK's extradition arrangements to strengthen the protection of British citizens””." As the hon. Member for Aberavon (Dr Francis) said, there is an emerging consensus in this House that that is something the Government should do. The political and emotional context in which the European arrest warrant emerged after the desperate events in New York on 11 September has been alluded to. In evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights at that time, the Liberal Democrat MEP Sir Graham Watson, who was chairman of the European Parliament's justice and home affairs committee, said that"““the proposal would still be on a shelf gathering dust if it hadn't been for the events in New York… Mr. Bin Laden helped make it a reality””." There is a great deal of truth to that. The workability of the European arrest warrant hinges on the principle of reciprocity between our courts and the courts of other countries. I will not dwell on this point because my right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Mr Davis) and my hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton spoke passionately about why that is not a reality. Another element that is central to making the European arrest warrant work is proportionality in its application. On 9 January 2007, the presidency of the European Council delivered a communiqué to the body's working party on co-operation in criminal matters, examining the application of the proportionality principle in matters relating to the European arrest warrant. Article 5 of the pre-Lisbon treaty on the functioning of the European Union stated that the proportionality principle is applied in respect of the four freedoms of the European Union, chiefly the free movement of goods, services, persons and capital. The treaty stated, however, that"““any action by the Community shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaty.””" It is surely clear that in its application, the European arrest warrant has gone well beyond proportional use. Let us look at some of the examples of warrants being issued. They have been issued in respect of offences such as the possession of 0.4 grams of cannabis, 1.5 grams of marijuana or three ecstasy tablets, the theft of two car tyres and even the theft of a piglet. There was also the case of a person arrested while driving a car with a blood alcohol level of 0.81 mg, compared with a UK limit of 0.80 mg. The problem has been recognised even by the European Commissioner with responsibility for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship. She stated last November that"““European arrest warrants should not be issued mechanically, or automatically, for crimes that are not very serious such as bicycle theft.””" Then there is the question of the number of European arrest warrants issued, which is also central to the application of the system. In 2009, the total number of arrest warrants issued was 14,789. My hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton will doubtless be aware that Bulgaria, Hungary and Italy were unable to provide figures for the number of arrest warrants issued in their countries. That backs up his point about the differences between systems. Poland issued 4,844, and France, a similar-sized country to the United Kingdom, issued 1,240. In the United Kingdom, we issued a mere 220. We can also examine where those citizens were living when the warrants were issued. Despite the United Kingdom being in the bottom quarter of issuers of warrants, those issued against people in the UK represented 38.8% of all the warrants issued across the whole European Union.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 537 c94-5
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Administration of justice Arrest warrants Extradition Human rights USA
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 14:19:00 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791471
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791471
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_791471