Extraordinary Extradition: Racial (In)justice in Britain

Abstract

In 2003 a new Extradition Act was fast-tracked into UK legislation without a formal consultative parliamentary process, scrutiny or debate. The Act made provisions for a unilateral agreement between the US and the UK whereby the UK would be expected to extradite any individual to the US on request, without the need for the US to provide prima facie evidence (only to invoke reasonable suspicion), and thus without allowing the individual called to challenge any evidence provided by the US in a British court of law. In contrast, in response to any requests made by the UK for extradition of subjects from the US, UK authorities are expected to provide enough evidence to demonstrate ‘probable cause’. Accordingly, since its inception the Act has been at the centre of much controversy, most notably because it has made explicit the hegemonic position of the US in Anglo-American relations and brought to popular attention the limits of UK national sovereignty.

There is a caged bird whose only wish is to be a bird again.

There is a caged bird that yearns to fly free again And soar over the mountain tops and glide through the valleys.

There is a caged bird that is no better than any other bird And no different to any other bird.

There is a caged bird whose wings have been cut and voice has been muted Whose only desire is to be a bird again.

That’s why the caged bird sings.

(Babar Ahmad, May 2007)

The reigning doctrine is sometimes called ‘American exception-alism’. It is nothing of the sort. It is probably close to universal among imperial powers.

(Noam Chomsky 2009)