Mazgula v Regional Court In Bielsko-Biala Poland

Extradition must be adjourned while an asylum claim is pending where Extradition Act 2003, section 39 prevents extradition. A claim based on prison overcrowding or risk from other prisoners requires evidence capable of establishing the high Article 3 threshold. An Article 8 challenge must also satisfy the established exceptional threshold, subject to any relaxation recognised in the authorities. The court may direct prompt listing once the asylum claim has been determined.

The appellant appealed against an extradition order made by District Judge Rose on 28 February 2012. Extradition was sought under a European arrest warrant to enforce a Polish sentence for robbery and theft.

He relied on Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, alleging poor prison conditions, risk from other prisoners and family circumstances. He had also recently intimated an asylum claim based on the same grounds. The central procedural issue was the effect of that pending claim on the extradition appeal.

1. The appeal could not be finally determined while the appellant’s asylum claim remained pending. Section 39 of the Extradition Act 2003 prevented extradition during that period.
2. The Article 3 challenge was untenable on the evidence. The alleged overcrowding and risk from other prisoners fell far short of establishing the degree of international consensus required to show that extradition would breach Article 3.
3. The Article 8 challenge also fell far short of the threshold established in Norris v United States of America, or of any possible relaxation recognised in HH.
4. The court adjourned the appeal pending the Secretary of State’s response to the asylum claim. The judge anticipated that the claim would be rejected and certified as clearly unfounded under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
5. The case was to be listed at the earliest opportunity after notification that the asylum claim had been determined. The judge observed that related asylum claims should be dealt with promptly so as not to frustrate lawful extradition.

• District Judge: On 28 February 2012, District Judge Rose ordered extradition after a contested hearing.
• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal was adjourned pending determination of the appellant’s asylum claim.