Ryba v Regional Court In Lodz, Poland

Under section 21A of the Extradition Act 2003, extradition may be ordered only where it is compatible with the requested person's Convention rights and proportionate. The court must consider only the seriousness of the alleged conduct, the likely penalty, and whether the foreign authorities may adopt less coercive measures. Serious allegations and the likely sentence may outweigh factors such as the age of the alleged offending and the passage of time. The proportionality assessment remains fact-sensitive and requires the court to balance the statutory matters before deciding whether surrender is justified.

The appellant appealed against the Westminster Magistrates' Court's order of 12 September 2014 for his extradition to Poland under a European Arrest Warrant issued by the Regional Court in Lodz. The warrant concerned allegations that he had participated in a criminal gang supplying illegal drugs between September 2004 and June 2006.

The appellant argued that surrender would disproportionately interfere with his private life. He appeared by video-link without representation and confirmed that he wished to return to Poland and did not wish to pursue the appeal. The issue was whether extradition was compatible with his Convention rights and proportionate under section 21A of the Extradition Act 2003.

1. Appeal dismissed. The court was required by section 21A(1) of the Extradition Act 2003 to order extradition only if satisfied that surrender was compatible with the appellant's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and proportionate.
2. Under section 21A(3), the court was required to take account only of:
   • the seriousness of the conduct alleged to constitute the extradition offence;
   • the likely penalty if the appellant were convicted; and
   • the possibility of less coercive measures being taken by the relevant foreign authorities.
3. The court was satisfied that extradition was compatible with the appellant's Convention rights and proportionate. The seriousness of the alleged participation in a drug-supplying criminal gang and the likely sentence outweighed the matters relied upon by the appellant, including the age at which the alleged offending occurred and the passage of approximately ten years.
4. The order for extradition was therefore maintained and the appeal was dismissed.

• Westminster Magistrates' Court: On 12 September 2014, ordered the appellant's extradition to Poland under a European Arrest Warrant.
• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal was dismissed and the extradition order upheld.