Leader: Unjust extradition laws must be amended

In this post-Enron era the prosecution and punishment of perpetrators of white collar crime and corporate fraud is something still high on the agenda for the US authorities.

High-profile sentences include 25 years for former WorldCom boss Bernie Ebbersm, 24 years for former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and 12 years for Sanjay Kumar, the former CEO of software company CA, for his part in a $2.2bn accounting fraud at the company. To rub salt in the latter's wound CA may also now sue Kumar for his legal expenses.

UK executives are now increasingly finding themselves caught up in the US crackdown on accounting scandals and corporate fraud, as highlighted by the recent cases of the NatWest Three and Jeremy Crook, the former European boss of US software company Peregrine Systems, all of whom deny the charges against them.

These cases highlight how the current extradition treaty between the UK and US conspires against a fair trial for those individuals.

Critics such as the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) believe the onus on US authorities to provide any evidence of the charges against UK citizens before extradition is approved by the courts and the Home Office is so small it amounts to effectively relinquishing responsibility for the execution of justice to the US.

The extradition treaty requires US prosecutors to obtain only a Grand Jury indictment naming a UK individual - and most Grand Jury hearings are held in secret - in order to request extradition.

No evidence needs to be presented to the UK courts or to the suspect. Once extradited the suspect must then support himself in the US for however long it takes for the case to come to trial - effectively meaning they must give up their job and leave behind any family and friends. Bail requests to return to the UK are usually turned down.

In Crook's case he was extradited in September and his trial has now been adjourned until sometime in the middle of 2008, although a bail hearing is due to decide if he can return to the UK for Christmas. He must now find a way to support himself for the next year and a half.

Security from A to Z

Click on the links below to find out more...

A is for Antivirus
B is for Botnets
C is for CMA
D is for DDoS
E is for Extradition
F is for Federated identity
G is for Google
H is for Hackers
I is for IM
J is for Jaschan (Sven)
K is for Kids
L is for Love Bug
M is for Microsoft
N is for Neologisms
O is for Orange
P is for Passwords
Q is for Questions
R is for Rootkits
S is for Spyware
T is for Two-factor authentication
U is for USB sticks/devices
V is for Virus variants
W is for Wi-fi
X is for OS X
Y is for You
Z is for Zero-day

Extradited suspects also face what the CBI calls "invidious" use of plea-bargaining agreements in the US, where the choice is between entering a guilty plea which might lead to a few years in a US jail or risk fighting the case, losing and facing the rest of their life behind bars.

Those guilty of committing white collar corporate fraud should undoubtedly be brought to justice for their crimes but this extradition process is hardly conducive to justice or a fair trail.

The danger is that it will only lead to further injustices and legal experts have warned that anyone who has been an executive at the UK arm of a US multinational tech company could find themselves being extradited and facing the rest of their life in jail with no right to view the evidence against them.

As Charlotta Blomberg, legal advisor on company affairs at the CBI, told silicon.com: "It's a real risk to anyone working in any company with US connections. The first thing people will know about it is when they get the knock on the door but unfortunately that's a position the UK government is happy to retain."