Polish Judicial Authority v Wolkowicz (Alias Del Ponti)

Section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 must be construed, so far as possible, consistently with the Framework Decision. Its express power to discharge a requested person cannot, however, be confined to temporary postponement of surrender.

In a suicide-risk case, the court makes an overall, fact-sensitive assessment. The threshold for unjust or oppressive extradition is high. The mental condition must remove the person’s capacity to resist the suicidal impulse, and the court must assess whether suicide is likely to succeed despite effective preventative measures. It must consider custody in the United Kingdom, transfer, and reception abroad. An EU receiving state will ordinarily be presumed able to protect the requested person unless strong evidence establishes the contrary.

Three requested persons appealed extradition orders made on European Arrest Warrants issued by judicial authorities in Poland and Lithuania. Each contended that extradition should be barred because his or her mental condition created a risk of suicide.

Wolkowicz relied on conflicting psychiatric evidence following conviction and accusation warrants from Poland. Biskup relied on evidence of serious mental illness and suicide risk in relation to Polish conviction and accusation warrants. Rizleriene, sought by Lithuania on a murder allegation, relied on schizophrenia, depression, self-harm and asserted inadequacy of treatment after surrender.

The court exceptionally received further psychiatric evidence. The central issue was whether the appellants’ conditions made extradition unjust or oppressive under section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003, having regard to the effectiveness of preventative and treatment arrangements.

1. All three appeals were dismissed. Section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 had to be interpreted, where possible, to achieve the Framework Decision’s result. That obligation did not permit the court to restrict the express statutory power to discharge a requested person to exceptional cases of temporary postponement. Parliament had conferred that power on the court using the established terms unjust and oppressive.

2. The court approved the seven-part approach in Turner v Government of the USA [2012] EWHC 2426 (Admin). The assessment is fact-sensitive and subject to a high threshold. The court must determine whether the person’s mental condition removes the capacity to resist a suicidal impulse, and whether the risk of suicide succeeding remains sufficiently great despite preventative steps. The public interest in honouring extradition obligations is relevant.

3. Preventative measures are normally decisive. They must be considered during United Kingdom detention, transfer, and detention in the requesting state. An EU state will ordinarily be presumed to discharge its responsibilities unless strong evidence calls its ability into question. Assurances will not usually be required.

4. For Wolkowicz, even assuming a high suicide risk, there was no evidence that effective safeguards could not operate in United Kingdom custody, during transfer, or in Poland. The Senior District Judge was entitled to prefer Dr Joseph’s psychiatric evidence. For Biskup, his serious illness had been managed in the United Kingdom and there was no evidential basis to conclude that Poland could not manage it. The evidence about his engagement with lawyers did not raise fitness to plead. For Rizleriene, direct evidence of Lithuanian prison and public-health facilities entitled the Deputy Senior District Judge to find that the risk could be addressed.

5. The court also directed that suicide-risk extradition appeals should ordinarily be heard within two to three weeks of the notice of appeal. Delay increases stress and self-harm risk, and may unnecessarily generate fresh psychiatric evidence.

• High Court (Administrative Court): The court dismissed the three appeals from extradition orders after considering the risk of suicide under section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003.
• Senior District Judge: Ordered Wolkowicz’s extradition to Poland on 15 October 2012.
• Senior District Judge: Ordered Biskup’s extradition to Poland on 6 August 2012.
• Deputy Senior District Judge: Ordered Rizleriene’s extradition to Lithuania on 11 September 2012.