About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

28 Queen's L.J. 95 (2002-2003)
The Balance between Liberty and Comity in the Evidentiary Requirements Applicable to Extradition Proceedings

handle is hein.journals/queen28 and id is 105 raw text is: The Balance Between Liberty and Comity in the Evidentiary Requirements Applicable to Extradition Proceedings Anne Warner La Forest* The 1999 Extradition Act altered evidentiary requirements applicable to extradition proceedings in Canada. Under the new Act, the extradition hearing is no longer analogous to a preliminary hearing and the evidence no longer must be admissible according to Canadian law. These changes were implemented, in part, to make extradition hearings more accessible to Canada's extradition partners, particularly civil law states and international tribunals. The author argues that these changes unnecessarily sacrifice thefugitive's right to a hearing in accordance with fundamental justice in favour of the state's interest in expediency and comity. The author begins with a historical review of admissibility and sufficiency practices under the former Act. Particular emphasis is given to the function and purposes of these rules and to Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms jurisprudence that broadly addresses the underlying structure of extradition and evidence used at extradition hearings. She then examines whether the current need for international cooperation justifies the changes made to evidentiary requirements under the new Act To this end, she provides a detailed overview of multilateral and comparative approaches to evidence at extradition hearings in several Commonwealth countries and in the United States. Based on this historical, purposive and comparative assessment of evidentiary requirements in extradition proceedings, the author concludes that the changes to the evidentiary provisions in the new Act are contrary to principles of fundamental justice. To bring these provisions within section 7 of the Charter, she suggests that the courts interpret them to allow for the assessment of the weight and reliability of evidence at extradition hearings. This would accommodate Canada's extradition partners by allowing them to submit evidence in accordance with their own procedures, while protecting the liberty interest of the fugitive in a manner consistent with Canadian preliminary proceedings. * Dean, Faculty of Law, University of New Brunswick. This article was completed while the author was a Visiting Fellow in the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School. A. Warner LaForest

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most