Judicial Authority of Belgium -Public Prosecutors Office of West Flanders Department Bruges v Rramoshi

In extradition proceedings, the seriousness of the alleged offending and the apparent risk of failure to surrender do not automatically require detention. The court must assess the particular circumstances, including the status of any conviction entered in the requested person’s absence, the person’s connections with the United Kingdom, and the safeguards available to secure attendance.

Where stringent conditions sufficiently address the risk of non-surrender, bail may properly be maintained. The conditions should be recorded in a fully drafted order with complete clarity and precision.

The Judicial Authority of Belgium appealed against the grant of bail to the requested person in extradition proceedings. The Belgian warrant stated that he had been convicted in his absence of 43 counts of human trafficking, including offences involving minors, and sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.

The requested person had not been served with notice of the Belgian proceedings and had a stated right to a retrial or appeal in which he could participate. He also relied on his long residence in the United Kingdom, British citizenship, family ties, settled accommodation, lack of United Kingdom convictions and compliance with proposed conditions.

The central issue was whether the risk of failure to surrender justified allowing the appeal against bail despite the proposed safeguards.

1. The appeal against the grant of bail was dismissed. The requested person’s bail was maintained subject to stringent conditions, including electronic tagging, a curfew, daily reporting at a police station, and surrender and retention of the passports of the requested person, his wife and their children.
2. The seriousness of the convictions and the apparent risk of absconding were substantial factors. The court nevertheless had to consider the qualification arising from the fact that the requested person had not appeared at trial, had not been served with notice of the proceedings, and had a right to a retrial or appeal in which he could participate.
3. The court considered the requested person’s long and open residence in the United Kingdom, British citizenship, family and accommodation arrangements, lack of United Kingdom convictions, and the proposed safeguards. It was not necessary to establish a particular risk of further offending before assessing the risk of failure to surrender.
4. Although the judge considered the evidential basis for the original bail decision unsatisfactory and would ordinarily have expected clear written or sworn evidence and supporting documents, it was not fair to allow the appeal solely because he adopted a more exacting evidential approach than the magistrates’ court.
5. The conditions were to be set out in a fully drafted order, expressed with complete clarity and precision.

• Westminster Magistrates’ Court: bail granted to the requested person in extradition proceedings, subject to conditions.
• High Court (Administrative Court): the prosecutor’s appeal against bail was dismissed and the grant of bail was maintained on stringent conditions.