Eduard Otto Goldstein v The Court of Caltanissetta Italy

In an extradition appeal based on prison conditions, general evidence of overcrowding does not by itself trigger a need for further information or assurances under Article 3. The evidence must be objective, reliable, specific and properly updated, and must demonstrate a reasonably arguable concern relating to the individual concerned. Statistics must also be understood by reference to the measurement methodology used, the number and duration of affected detainees, and the applicable Article 3 standard. Evidence based on different national or institutional capacity standards may be misleading and insufficient to establish a violation.

The appellant had been ordered by District Judge Sternberg to be extradited to Italy in connection with allegations of supplying cocaine and participating in a robbery conspiracy involving a firearm. Permission to appeal was adjourned to consider alleged risks under Article 3 arising from Italian prison conditions, particularly in Sicily. Article 8 was abandoned.

The appellant relied on translated articles, material from the Antigone Observatory, an Italian lawyer’s report and further documents. The central issue was whether that material was sufficient to make an Article 3 appeal reasonably arguable, or to require further information or assurances concerning detention in Italy.

1. Article 3 threshold. The appeal raised no reasonably arguable Article 3 case. The material did not possess the degree of cogency required to prompt a review of the established position that assurances concerning Italian prison conditions were not generally required. It was not objective, reliable, specific and properly updated evidence demonstrating an individualised concern.
2. Assessment of overcrowding evidence. References to less than 3m² of cell space and statistics describing overcrowding required careful analysis. The figures could not be treated as establishing an Article 3 risk without details of how many detainees were affected and for how long, and without considering the measurement methodology. The relevant Strasbourg minimum included furniture, whereas the Antigone methodology did not.
3. Capacity statistics. Antigone’s national overcrowding statistics were also potentially misleading because they used national or institutional capacity standards of 6m² or 9m² per detainee, rather than the Article 3 minimum of 3m². The material concerning Caltanissetta prison recorded that all cells visited ensured at least 3m² per person.
4. Other risks. Evidence concerning suicide rates and protection from harm by non-state agents did not trigger a need for further information or an assurance. The material itself referred to arrangements for moving detainees to protect them from such risks.
5. Disposition. Permission to appeal was refused. Permission to adduce the putative fresh evidence was formally refused because it could not be decisive.

• High Court (Administrative Court): permission to appeal against the extradition decision was refused. Permission to adduce putative fresh evidence was also refused.
• Westminster Magistrates’ Court: District Judge Sternberg ordered extradition to Italy on 13 September 2023 after a hearing on 25 July 2023. The court had refused an adjournment on 21 July 2023.