Traljesic v Bosnia and Herzegovina [2017] FCAFC 70

Traljesic v Bosnia and Herzegovina [2017] FCAFC 70

The appellant did not establish on the evidence that the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina were complicit in or condoned mistreatment and the reasons for it; mere knowledge and lack of action by prison authorities was insufficient to constitute an extradition objection under s 7(c). The Evidence Act did not operate to exclude material duly admitted before the magistrate; even if it had, the outcome would be unchanged as the documents were given no real weight.

Parties
Appellant: Rasim Traljesic; First Respondent: Bosnia and Herzegovina; Second Respondent: Frank Holzer
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Full Court Appeal From Federal Court Decision Under S 21(3) of the Extradition Act 1988 (cth)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extradition, Construction of Extradition Act S 7(c), Evidence Act Applicability, International Law Influence
Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Extradition Construction of Extradition Act S 7(c) Evidence Act Applicability International Law Influence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rasim Traljesic

Appellant

Bosnia and Herzegovina

First Respondent

Frank Holzer

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Full Court Appeal From Federal Court Decision Under S 21(3) of the Extradition Act 1988 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 7(c) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) provides an extradition objection based on risk of punishment due to political opinions in circumstances of conduct by non-State actors
  2. 2 Whether Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) applies to the appeal/review proceeding and governs admissibility of material before the reviewing court

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not establish on the evidence that the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina were complicit in or condoned mistreatment and the reasons for it; mere knowledge and lack of action by prison authorities was insufficient to constitute an extradition objection under s 7(c). The Evidence Act did not operate to exclude material duly admitted before the magistrate; even if it had, the outcome would be unchanged as the documents were given no real weight.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellant pay the first respondent's costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed.