Ramda, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 27 Jun 2002

The Government of France sought the extradition of Ramda wanted by them for trial in connection with a series of terrorist bombings in France. The applicant resisted extradition to France on the ground that the evidence which would be relied on against him at trial had been obtained by torture and that he would be unable to resist its admission.
Held: ‘Among the issues for the Home Secretary to determine may be whether the trial to be faced by the wanted person will be a fair trial. This may involve the voluntariness of extra-judicial confessions relied on as against him.’ If these points were made out, his trial would not be fair and the Secretary of State would be effectively bound to refuse to extradite him.
Sedley LJ
[2002] EWHC 1278 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedMontgomery and Coulter v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 19-Oct-2000
The test of whether a defendant’s common law right to a fair trial had been damaged by pre-trial publicity was similar to the test under the Convention, and also where there was any plea of oppression. The substantial difference is that no balancing . .
CitedKanda v Government of the Federation of Malaya PC 2-Apr-1962
A police Inspector had been dismissed on a finding of an offence against discipline. . He complained that he had not been allowed to see the report of the Board of Inquiry which contained prejudicial material and which had been relied upon by the . .

Cited by:
CitedA, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Aug-2004
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence . .
CitedA and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) HL 8-Dec-2005
The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 April 2021; Ref: scu.175113