Extradition proceedings

2018 PLD 258 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Art. 15Extradition Act (XXI of 1972), Ss. 5 & 6Freedom of movement, etc.ScopeFugitiveExtradition proceedings

Article 15 of the Constitution was never intended to afford protection against extradition to citizens who were accused of serious crimes in other (foreign) countries.

2018 PLD 258 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 4 & 7Extradition proceedingsNon-treaty StateOrder of Magisterial enquiry

Extradition of a person in Pakistan to a foreign State (whether or not an extradition treaty had been executed between Pakistan and such a State) could not take place outside the provisions of the Extradition Act, 1972 which were required to be strictly construed

Provisions of the Extradition Act, 1972 could be made applicable for the extradition of a person in Pakistan to a non-treaty State only after a notification in terms of S. 4 of the said Act

Neither could the Federal Government issue an order to a Magistrate of First Class to enquire into the case under S.7 nor could such a Magistrate summon or arrest a fugitive offender, without there being a notification under S. 4 of the Extradition Act, 1972

Where no notification in terms of S. 4 had been issued by the Federal Government, any proceedings taken with respect to the extradition of a person to a non-treaty State by an enquiry Magistrate nominated by the Federal Government in terms of S. 7, would be coram non judice and without lawful authority.

2018 PLD 258 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 4 & 8Extradition proceedingsNon-treaty StateOrder of Magisterial enquiry

Government of foreign country (United Kingdom), made a request to Pakistan for the appellant's extradition for his trial on the charge of murdering eight persons in the foreign country

Appellant was arrested in Pakistan, and the enquiry Magistrate found that there was a prima facie case against the appellant warranting his extradition to the foreign country under the provisions of the Extradition Act, 1972

Appellant challenged said order by way of Constitutional petition before the High Court, which was dismissed

Held, that an extradition treaty had not been executed between Pakistan and the foreign country in question (United Kingdom)

When there was no extradition treaty between Pakistan and the foreign State, the provisions of the Extradition Act, 1972 could be made applicable for the return of persons to such a non-treaty State provided the requirements of S. 4 of the Extradition Act, 1972 were fulfilled

In the present case, the enquiry Magistrate requested the Ministry of Interior to issue a notification under S. 4 of the Extradition Act, 1972 along with the nomination of an enquiry Magistrate to conduct an enquiry under S. 7 of the said Act

Ministry of Interior did issue a notification directing that the provisions of the said Act shall have effect in relation to the foreign country with respect to the extradition of the appellant who was wanted on charges of multiple murders

Although the enquiry Magistrate was appointed three days prior to the issuance of the notification under S. 4, but this by itself did not render the entire proceedings before the enquiry Magistrate, coram non judice or unlawful

At best, this was an irregularity which stood cured when the notification under S. 4 was issued

Number of documents were exhibited in the proceedings before the enquiry Magistrate, including the statement of the investigating officer of the case

In said statement, the appellant had been specifically implicated for conspiracy to commit arson with intent to endanger life and murder of eight persons

Investigating officer had also made mention of a confession made by the appellant to a woman about his involvement in the said offence

Additionally the appellant was also implicated by a witness in the case

Said statements were enough to show a prima facie case of the appellant's involvement in the offence that he was charged with in the foreign country

Constitutional petition filed by the appellant against his extradition had been rightly dismissed

Intra court appeal was dismissed accordingly.

2014 PLD 10 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 2, 3, 4, 7 & 8Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199Constitutional petitionExtradition proceedingsNon-treaty State, request ofPetitioners were arrested by authorities on request of Afghanistan for their extraditionValidity

Afghanistan was neither Treaty State nor Federal Government had issued requisite notification in favour of proceedings against petitioners under S.4 of Extradition Act, 1972

Applicability of provisions of Extradition Act, 1972, to petitioners was beyond the mandate of law

Arrest of petitioners and their detention was illegal and without lawful authority

High Court directed the authorities to release petitioners forthwith

Petition was allowed in circumstances.