Daily Bulletin

The Conversation

  • Written by Kevin Boreham, Lecturer in International Law, Australian National University
image

The federal government today announced it will not proceed with the ratification of an extradition treaty with China. This followed strong indications that the Senate would block it from coming into force.

The treaty contains most of the usual protections against anyone being extradited to China where their human rights would be violated. But an important omission is a guarantee that extradition would not be approved when it would be “unjust or oppressive”.

This failure to implement puts Australia at a significant disadvantage. The usual procedures for extradition between countries with substantial and complex bilateral relations will now not be available.

Background to the treaty

The treaty was concluded in 2007. Under the standard procedure for ratification, the government submitted the treaty to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, which recommended its ratification.

However, the committee made several recommendations for better human rights protections – not all of which the government accepted.

A dissenting report by the committee’s Labor MPs recommended that ratification be delayed until after an independent review of the Extradition Act:

… to ensure that Australia’s extradition system continues to be consistent with community expectations and international legal obligations regarding the rule of law and human rights.

The government did not accept that recommendation on the grounds that the act had been subject to several reviews in recent years.

There has been some confusion over what the Senate would actually have done had the government not pulled the treaty. The Senate cannot prevent ratification, which is entirely a matter for the government. The Senate’s relevant power is that it can disallow regulations.

Independent Senator Cory Bernardi had given notice of a motion to disallow the regulations approved by the governor-general that would have added China as “an extradition country” under the Extradition Act. This would have meant no extradition to China could take place under the treaty.

The government’s decision to withdraw the treaty apparently means it will not proceed to ratification. It recognised it could not be implemented.

What are the objections to the treaty?

The objections to the treaty are mostly based on the Chinese legal system’s deficiencies.

The Law Council of Australia has said that China:

… does not act in accordance with procedural fairness and rule of law standards in criminal proceedings.

And political theorist Francis Fukuyama wrote last year that:

China does not have true rule of law because there is no independent judicial system.

The treaty does include the standard provisions that extradition would not take place where:

  • the offence is political;

  • the person may have been prosecuted on discriminatory grounds (including race, religion, nationality and political opinion);

  • the person has already been convicted or punished (double jeopardy);

  • the offence is a military offence only; or

  • if transferred, the prisoner was likely to suffer torture or face the death penalty.

The Australian government also emphasised that the Extradition Act contains a general discretion to refuse surrender. This enables consideration by the decision-maker (the attorney-general or the justice minister) of human rights concerns, including whether an extradited person would have access to a fair trial.

However, the Law Council of Australia has assessed that the assurances regarding this right provided inadequate protection. This is because they relied on the discretion of the decision-makers in each country, and the process could be “influenced by a wide range of factors”.

The treaty contains a discretionary ground for refusal of an extradition request where extradition would be:

… incompatible with humanitarian considerations in view of that person’s age, health or other personal circumstances.

However, the treaty did not add to this provision the words “unjust or oppressive”, which are contained in ten other Australian bilateral extradition treaties. The attorney-general’s department was unable to explain to the parliamentary committee why these words had not been included. It stressed that each extradition treaty is unique.

The decision not to proceed with the extradition treaty creates an anomalous situation in which Australia does not have bilateral extradition arrangements with its largest two-way trading partner in goods and services. The two-way movement of students, tourists and businesspeople is very large. It is bound to give rise to situations in which a valid request for extradition may be made by either Australia or China.

An extradition agreement is not essential to responding to an extradition request, which can be handled ad hoc. But there is now no mechanism with appropriate safeguards to mandate how such a request should be dealt with.

Authors: Kevin Boreham, Lecturer in International Law, Australian National University

Read more http://theconversation.com/explainer-why-the-government-pulled-australias-extradition-treaty-with-china-74984

Writers Wanted

Israel-Palestinian violence: why East Jerusalem has become a flashpoint in a decades-old conflict

arrow_forward

How much can I spend on my home renovation? A personal finance expert explains

arrow_forward

4 Top Reasons to Install Range Hoods

arrow_forward

The Conversation
INTERWEBS DIGITAL AGENCY

Politics

Prime Minister interview with Karl Stefanovic and Allison Langdon

Karl Stefanovic: PM, good morning to you. Do you have blood on your hands?   PRIME MINISTER: No, it's obviously absurd. What we're doing here is we've got a temporary pause in place because we'v...

Karl Stefanovic and Allison Langdon - avatar Karl Stefanovic and Allison Langdon

Prime Minister Scott Morrison delivered Keynote Address at AFR Business Summit

Well, thank you all for the opportunity to come and be with you here today. Can I also acknowledge the Gadigal people, the Eora Nation, the elders past and present and future. Can I also acknowled...

Scott Morrison - avatar Scott Morrison

Morrison Government commits record $9B to social security safety net

The Morrison Government is enhancing our social security safety net by increasing support for unemployed Australians while strengthening their obligations to search for work.   From March the ...

Scott Morrison - avatar Scott Morrison

Business News

The Age Of Advertising: The Importance of Online Business Advertisements

The language of advertising had long grown since its modern beginning in the 15th century when printing was all the jazz. Nowadays, it continues to flourish and adapt as new mediums are created, a...

NewsCo - avatar NewsCo

What is Hampering Your Good Sleep? 7 Things to Check

A good sleep is the pillar of a healthy body and a strong mind. Countless studies have proven how a good night’s sleep goes hand in hand with good health and a productive day ahead. Sleep has an i...

NewsCo - avatar NewsCo

Perks of Acquiring an Established Business

There is a growing trend of buying well-established businesses in Australia. It seems like budding entrepreneurs are finally understanding the perks of buying an established firm as opposed to start...

NewsCo - avatar NewsCo