Bigos v District Court In Tarnobrzeg, Poland

In extradition proceedings, a requesting European state is presumed able to provide appropriate medical care and reasonable protection to a person in custody. Physical or mental ill-health, including withdrawal from alcoholism and an historic head injury, will not ordinarily require discharge under section 25 without evidence overcoming that presumption. Threats from private individuals, even if genuine, do not generally provide a ground for preventing extradition where the person will be detained by the requesting state.

The appellant challenged an order made by District Judge Evans at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 1 August 2012 directing his extradition to Poland on an accusation warrant concerning three alleged drug-trafficking offences in 2007.

He argued that his physical and mental condition required discharge under section 25, relying on an historic head injury and withdrawal from alcoholism. He also claimed that gang members had threatened to kill him if he returned to Poland. The appeal concerned whether either issue was capable of preventing extradition.

1. Appeal dismissed. The District Judge was entitled to refuse an adjournment for further medical evidence and to reject the argument that the appellant’s condition required his discharge under section 25.
2. There is a presumption that the authorities in a European requesting state such as Poland can provide appropriate medical care. The court relied on the recent Divisional Court decision in Stopyra v Poland. The appellant’s historic head injury and alcoholism did not, without more, displace that presumption.
3. The District Judge was also entitled to conclude that Poland, particularly its prison authorities, could provide reasonable protection against inter-prisoner violence. The appellant’s claim that he had been threatened and assaulted by gang members did not establish a ground for blocking extradition.
4. The alleged danger after release from custody was materially different. Once released, where the appellant chose to go would be a matter for him. That possibility did not make extradition impermissible.

• High Court (Administrative Court): On appeal from an order of District Judge Evans at Westminster Magistrates’ Court dated 1 August 2012, the appeal against extradition to Poland was dismissed.