When exercising the s 22 determination power under the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) in cases involving in absentia convictions, the Minister must be clearly advised whether the conviction would be considered unjust by Australian standards before weighing that factor against the nature of the offence and the interests of the requesting state under Art 9(2)(b) of the relevant extradition treaty. A departmental submission that merely acknowledges it is 'open' to afford 'some weight' to assertions that a trial was not conducted in accordance with Australian standards, without clearly identifying that such a conviction could not be countenanced under Australian law and practice, carries a real risk of constructively misleading the Minister. Australia's non-refoulement obligations under the ICCPR do not, at this time, extend to Art 14 fair trial rights.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.