Sagman v Government of Turkey & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 474 (18 June 2001)

Sagman v Government of Turkey & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 474 (18 June 2001)

The extraordinary and unjustified delay of approximately 15 years, largely attributable to the Turkish authorities, combined with the risk of prejudice to a fair trial and hardship to the applicant, renders extradition unjust and oppressive under section 11(3) of the Extradition Act 1989. The application for habeas corpus is granted and the applicant is discharged.

Citation
[2001] EWHC Admin 474
Parties
Claimant: Burak Sagman; First Defendant: The Government of Turkey; Second Defendant: The Governor of HM Prison Brixton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus / Judgment After Committal for Extradition
Outcome
Application granted; applicant discharged
Legal Topics
Habeas Corpus, Extradition Act 1989, Passage of Time, Oppression and Injustice, Limitation Periods, Fair Trial Rights
Criminal Law Extradition Law Human Rights Law Habeas Corpus Extradition Act 1989 Passage of Time Oppression and Injustice Limitation Periods +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Burak Sagman

Claimant

The Government of Turkey

First Defendant

The Governor of HM Prison Brixton

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus / Judgment After Committal for Extradition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition after a 15-year delay would be unjust or oppressive under section 11(3) of the Extradition Act 1989
  2. 2 Whether the delay was attributable to the Turkish authorities
  3. 3 Whether the applicant would face an unfair trial in Turkey due to the constitution of the State Security Court

Ratio Decidendi

The extraordinary and unjustified delay of approximately 15 years, largely attributable to the Turkish authorities, combined with the risk of prejudice to a fair trial and hardship to the applicant, renders extradition unjust and oppressive under section 11(3) of the Extradition Act 1989. The application for habeas corpus is granted and the applicant is discharged.

Court Disposition

Application granted; applicant discharged

Orders

  • Applicant discharged from extradition proceedings
  • Defendant's costs order made in favour of the applicant, including lower court proceedings