The Federal Court held that where an extradition request, indictments, and arrest warrants consistently identify the offence as aggravated kidnapping, references in supporting materials to 'crimes against humanity' reflect the requesting state's contextual classification of the circumstances (affecting limitation periods and sentencing) rather than the identity of the extradition offence itself. The characterisation of the extradition offence for the purposes of the double criminality requirement in Art II(4)(a) of the Treaty is determined by the offence as identified in the formal request documents, not by the legal consequences that the requesting state's law attaches to the context in which the offence was committed. The Court further held that the specialty obligation in Art XVIII of the Treaty does not require the Minister to undertake an anticipatory inquiry into how the requesting state's courts may characterise the surrounding circumstances of the offending upon conviction, where the material discloses no real prospect of prosecution or sentencing for a different offence.
The full text is available to signed-in members.