Extradition

 

Guernica 37 Chambers has a well established extradition practice. Our members have extensive experience advising and representing individuals, foreign governments, and judicial authorities in complex and high profile extradition cases, appearing in courts at every level, including Westminster Magistrates’ Court, the High Court, and the Supreme Court.

 

Members have acted in prominent extradition proceedings involving individuals facing trial across multiple jurisdictions, including the Balkans, South Asia, Latin America, North America, Africa, and numerous EU Member States under the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TaCA) schemes. With a multilingual and culturally diverse team, we are perfectly placed to meet the varied needs of our diverse client base.

 

Some notable recent examples include:  Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Andrysiewicz v Circuit Court in Lodz, Poland [2025] UKSC 23, India v Arti Dhir & Kaval Raijada, and United States of America v Richard Klemis.

 

Proceedings before Westminster Magistrates’ Court

 

Following an arrest in England or Wales under the arrest warrant from the requesting state, all individuals appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court. They can opt to consent to extradition but often choose not to consent. Our members make strong representations to the court to secure bail. We also provide specialist bespoke advice on challenging extradition requests and preparation for the extradition hearing. Our members competently represent clients at their extradition hearing.

 

Appeal against extradition order to the High Court

 

If extradition is ordered by Westminster Magistrates’ Court, our members advise clients on the prospects of appeal and grounds that can be raised to challenge the extradition order. They draft written submissions and represent clients in the High Court hearings. 

 

Proceedings before the Supreme Court

 

If an extradition matter involves a point of law of ‘general public importance’, we can apply for certification of a specific question on a point of law of ‘general public importance’ to the Supreme Court.

 

Judicial review 

 

Judicial review can be a very effective civil remedy, where the High Court rectifies serious injustices that would otherwise evade challenge. This remedy nullifies or quashes a decision made by a lower court or a public body such as the police, National Crime Agency, or the Home Office. We often advise clients on judicial review applications and interim injunctions, or stays, to stop removal from the UK.

 

When all domestic remedies are exhausted

 

If all challenges at the domestic level are unsuccessful, we can advise on the prospects of bringing a human rights complaint before the European Court of Human Rights. We can seek a delay or stay in removal from the Court through a request for interim measures or Rule 39 request. We can also advise on the recourse to the various United Nations mechanisms and special procedures.

​

​

​

INTERPOL

​

Guernica 37 Chambers has a specialist INTERPOL defence practice. Our members regularly advise and represent individuals affected by INTERPOL Notices, Diffusions and other forms of data processing, often alongside parallel extradition proceedings in the UK and abroad.

Working closely with extradition practitioners and foreign lawyers, we provide coordinated, strategic representation across multiple jurisdictions.

​

Our assistance includes:

​

● Advising on the legal effect of Red, Blue, Green and Yellow Notices and Diffusions.

● Emergency advice following arrest, detention or border intervention.

● Strategic coordination between INTERPOL challenges, extradition proceedings and asylum or immigration matters.

● Liaison with foreign counsel and national authorities.

​

Access Requests to INTERPOL

​

We advise and act in Access Requests to INTERPOL’s independent oversight body, the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (“CCF”). We prepare and submit legally robust Access Requests, manage correspondence with the CCF, and advise on urgent protective steps where the existence of INTERPOL data creates an immediate risk of arrest or restriction of movement.

​

Deletion Requests and Challenges to INTERPOL Data

​

Our members have particular expertise in challenging Red Notices and Diffusions on grounds including:

• Political motivation or misuse of criminal law

• Absence of a genuine criminal offence (civil, commercial or administrative disputes)

• Violations of International Human Rights Law

• Lack of due process or defective national warrants

 

INTERPOL, Extradition and Cross-Border Proceedings

​

INTERPOL alerts frequently act as the trigger for arrest and extradition proceedings. Our INTERPOL practice is fully integrated with our extradition work, allowing us to challenge cases at every stage.

​

We regularly advise on:

​

• The impact of INTERPOL Notices on extradition proceedings before Westminster Magistrates’ Court

• Coordinated challenges to both extradition requests and INTERPOL data

• Strategic use of INTERPOL decisions in domestic courts and appeals

• Parallel proceedings involving asylum, immigration or human rights claims

​

Through our international network, we work closely with foreign lawyers to ensure consistent and effective representation across jurisdictions.

​

Neutrality, Human Rights and Safeguards

​

INTERPOL is constitutionally bound by strict neutrality and is prohibited from engaging in matters of a political, military, religious or racial character. Where these principles are breached, the CCF provides a critical safeguard.

​

Our members are experienced in identifying and evidencing such violations and in advancing arguments grounded in INTERPOL’s Constitution, Rules on the Processing of Data and international human rights law.