Section 25: Appeal/petition for judicial review
39
1. Within a period of [x]days after the decision of the [competent judicial
authority] has been rendered under section 24 of the present law, an appeal or
other applicable petition for judicial review may be lodged before the [competent
judicial appeal authority of country adopting the law] by:
a) the person sought, if the [competent judicial authority of country
adopting the law] has found him eligible for extradition; or
b) the [competent prosecutorial authority of country adopting the law],
acting on behalf of the requesting State, if the [competent judicial
authority of country adopting the law] has found the person sought not
eligible for extradition
40
.
2. An appeal or other applicable petition for judicial review lodged under
subsection (1) shall be scheduled for hearing at an early date whether that date is
in or out the prescribed sessions of the [competent judicial appeal authority of
39
There are different national approaches regarding the legal remedies against an extradition decision.
In most countries the recourse is limited to the judicial stage of extradition proceedings, while in others
to the administrative stage, so that the courts are considered to be administrative ones.
Other countries allow a recourse at both stages, e.g. before and after the decision of the executive
authority on the surrender of the person sought to the requesting State. Given that, countries adopting
the latter two-tier judicial review system in extradition proceedings may include in their extradition
legislation a separate provision that could be incorporated, for example, in section 26 of the present law,
enabling the person sought to have recourse to the competent Administrative Court, challenging
(usually by virtue of domestic constitutional provisions) the decision of the competent executive
authority on his surrender to the requesting State. In this case, the division of labour between the
judicial authorities concerning the adjudication on the legal issues at stake is basically developed at the
jurisprudential level.
In addition, legislations of other States provide for two (one judicial and one administrative) reviews,
but at the same time defer the appeal hearing available at the judicial stage until the competent
executive authority renders a decision on the surrender of the person sought, so that both reviews be
heard at the same time. In this case, appropriate adjustments could be made in the text of the present
law, so that the provisions on review proceedings be grouped together after section 26 on executive
discretion.
In any case, it is recommended that, in order to achieve judicial economy and accelerate the extradition
process without prejudicing the effectiveness of judicial review, a single appeal mechanism be adopted,
whenever consistent with basic constitutional principles, that would review appropriate factual and
legal issues with a view to eliminating repeated and partial reviews.
40
National authorities would need to be prepared to serve a new extradition arrest warrant, in case an
appeal against the judicial decision is lodged by the competent prosecutorial authority on behalf of the
requesting State under this section of the present law. They also need to be prepared to serve a new
arrest warrant for domestic charges in case section 15 of the present law is applicable.
42