Former Fifa executive and government minister Jack Warner has been granted conditional leave to pursue his final appeal over the dismissal of his lawsuit, challenging the United States (US) extradition request for him.
During a hearing at the Hall of Justice in Port-of-Spain yesterday, Appellate Judges Nolan Bereaux, Judith Jones and Charmaine Pemberton granted preliminary permission for Warner to pursue the appeal in the Privy Council against two successive decisions by a High Court judge and the Court of Appeal.
As part of their decision, the judges also granted Warner another stay of his extradition proceedings before Chief Magistrate Maria Busby-Earle-Caddle, which have been put on hold since Warner brought his novel judicial review claim.
Presenting submissions on behalf of the Office of the Attorney General (AG), Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes did not oppose the appeal but requested that it be handled expeditiously.
Mendes noted that Warner’s claim, if upheld on appeal, had far-reaching consequences as it would mean that all extraditions to the United States would be deemed unlawful. “If he is correct then no one can be extradited until it is corrected,” Mendes said.
Responding to the submissions, Warner’s lawyer Fyard Hosein, SC, agreed that the case should be determined quickly but claimed that his client was bound by processes and time-frames of the United Kingdom-based court.
During the hearing, Bereaux sought to question Hosein’s claims that Warner would be prosecuted for offences, which fall outside the United States (US) extradition request. Bereaux suggested that the US may be reluctant to do so as such action may affect future cases.
“It is hardly likely they would get another one validated. That is the risk they run,” Bereaux said.
In granting Warner’s applications, Bereaux and his colleagues reduced the time-frames to complete the procedural aspects of the appeal including paying the £500 fee and approving the records of the two previous judgements in the case.
In his lawsuit, Warner is challenging the procedure adopted by the AG Office in signing off on the US’s request for his extradition, made in May 2015.
Warner is alleging that this country’s extradition treaty with the US contradicts the Extradition (Commonwealth and Foreign Territories) Act. He is claiming that, in passing the act, Parliament afforded citizens certain protections which are ignored by the international treaty.
In his 50-page judgment, delivered in September 2017, High Court judge James Aboud agreed that there were minor inconsistencies between the treaty and legislation, but said Warner’s concerns were exaggerated and speculative.
Aboud also noted that Warner’s rights would be protected during the eventual extradition proceedings before Busby-Earle-Caddle as she would have to apply local laws to the charges against Warner alleged in the US extradition request.
As a secondary issue, Warner also complaining that AG Faris Al-Rawi failed to give his attorneys a fair opportunity to make representations to him before he signed off on the Authority to Proceed, which was required to kick off the proceedings in the magistrates’ court.
Aboud ruled that Warner did not have a right to be consulted.
In July, Appellate Judges Gregory Smith, Prakash Moosai and Andre Des Vignes upheld Aboud’s judgement.
Warner is also being represented by Rishi Dass, Nyree Alphonso, and Anil Maraj, while Michael Quamina appeared alongside Mendes for the AG’s Office.