1 / 13

Double jeopardy and Mutual Legal Assistance

Double jeopardy and Mutual Legal Assistance. Nick Vamos, UK Central Authority, Home Office. Overview. What is MLA? CICA and the role of UKCA Double jeopardy as a ground for refusal Scenarios Other issues. What is MLA?. Proceedings in one country, evidence in another

thuy
Download Presentation

Double jeopardy and Mutual Legal Assistance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Double jeopardy and Mutual Legal Assistance Nick Vamos, UK Central Authority, Home Office

  2. Overview • What is MLA? • CICA and the role of UKCA • Double jeopardy as a ground for refusal • Scenarios • Other issues

  3. What is MLA? • Proceedings in one country, evidence in another • Formal process of requesting and providing evidence and other assistance in criminal proceedings • Governed by international agreements and domestic law • State-to-State relationship via competent authorities

  4. CICA and the role of UKCA • Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003 gives the Home Secretary (via UKCA) the discretion to arrange for evidence to be obtained • Minimum statutory requirements • Must act lawfully and in interests of justice • No obligation to accede but presumption that request will be granted • Grounds of refusal: matter of policy not law. Home Secretary decides • Prejudice to sovereignty, security, ordre public or other essential interests of the requested party; double jeopardy; political motivation

  5. Double jeopardy as a ground for refusal UK reservation to the European MLA Convention 1959 “…the Government… reserves the right to refuse assistance of the person who is the subject of the request for assistance has been convicted or acquitted in the UK or in the third State of an offence which arises from the same conduct as that giving rise to proceedings in the requesting State in respect of that person.”

  6. Double jeopardy as a ground for refusal Article 10 of the draft European Investigation Order “… the execution of the EIO would be contrary to the principle of ne bis in idem, unless the issuing authority provides an assurance that the evidence transferred as a result of an execution of an EIO shall not be used to prosecute a person whose case has been finally disposed of in another Member State for the same facts, in accordance with the conditions set out under Article 54 of the Convention of 19 June 1990 implementing the Schengen Agreement.” UK Model MLA Treaty “…if the request relates to a person who, if proceeded against in the Requested Party for the offence for which assistance is requested, would be entitled to be discharged on the grounds of a previous acquittal or conviction.”

  7. Wider scope of discretion • Ordre public incorporates abuse of process jurisdiction e.g. where no final disposal or not similar facts/conduct • If futher proceedings permissible in UK then not contrary to ordre public e.g. tainted acquittals, compelling new evidence

  8. Scenario 1 • Defendant (D) convicted in the UK for importation of cocaine from country A. • Country A sends request for all evidence against D for the purpose of prosecuting him for exportation of cocaine.

  9. Scenario 2 • Defendant (D) convicted in the UK for multi-victim investment fraud in relation to property in country A. • Conviction based on specimen substantive counts covering entire offending period • Country A sends request for evidence against D for the purpose of prosecuting him for same offences in relation to victims in Country A

  10. Scenario 3 • Defendant (D) acquitted in Country A of murdering her husband by hiring a hitman • Country A send request to UK saying hitman has now provided written confession that D hired him. Paid into UK bank account so bank records requested

  11. Scenario 4 • Multi-national Company D Ltd being investigated in several countries (X, Y and Z) for corporate fraud • D Ltd reaches plea agreement with Country X • Country Y send request for evidence in UK for the purpose of prosecuting D Ltd for offences in Y • D Ltd say plea agreement with X precludes further prosecutions in Y and Z therefore UK should not assist • X say plea agreement only intended to cover offences in X

  12. Scenario 5 • UK was at war with Country A. Corporal D accused of shooting enemy soldier in circumstances that may amount to War Crime under Geneva Convention • UK police investigate, including travelling to A to gather evidence. First Treasury Counsel advises and DPP takes decision that insufficient evidence for prosecution • A send request to UK for all evidence against D for purpose of prosecuting him for War Crime. Assert universal jurisdiction under Geneva Convention on basis that D has not been prosecuted in UK

  13. Other issues • How do we know? • UK proceedings may be identified by police • Corporate fraud: pre-emptive solicitors reps • May never know! • Enforcement of rights • Judicial review of UKCA, police, Court • Remedy in requesting State

More Related