Waszkiewicz v District Court of Poznan, Poland

Under Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003, a person convicted in absence may be discharged under section 20 where the statutory conditions are met. An extradition appeal will not ordinarily be adjourned merely to allow a detained appellant to make representations personally where he has legal representation, has failed to attend court, and has advanced no grounds of appeal. In the absence of any ground showing that extradition should not take place, the appeal must be dismissed.

The appellant was arrested under two European Arrest Warrants issued by courts in Poland. The warrants sought his extradition to serve sentences imposed for theft and criminal damage. At Westminster Magistrates’ Court, District Judge Zani ordered extradition.

The appellant appealed to the Administrative Court. His case was that he had been convicted in his absence and was therefore protected by section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003. The magistrates’ court held that the section 20 bar was unavailable because the relevant warrant boxes had been crossed out or marked as not applicable. No other bar to extradition was advanced.

1. Adjournment. The application to adjourn the appeal so that the appellant could make representations personally was refused. The appellant was in custody, had refused prison transport, and had legal representation. Any representations could and should have been made at the hearing.
2. Section 20. Poland was a category 1 territory, so extradition was governed by Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003. Section 20 required discharge where a person had been convicted in absence and was not entitled to a retrial unless he had deliberately absented himself. The appellant’s reliance on that bar had already been rejected because the relevant parts of the warrants had been crossed out or stated to be not applicable.
3. Disposition. No other ground was advanced to show that extradition should not take place. The appeal was dismissed.

• Westminster Magistrates’ Court: District Judge Zani ordered the appellant’s extradition to Poland on 26 March 2013.
• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal against that order was dismissed.