U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

29–118 ★ (Star Print) 

" ! SENATE 108TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

TREATY DOC. 

2004

108–23 

EXTRADITION TREATY WITH UNITED KINGDOM 

MESSAGE 

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING

EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND 

NORTHERN IRELAND, AND RELATED EXCHANGES OF LETTERS, 

SIGNED AT WASHINGTON ON MARCH 31, 2003 

APRIL 19, 2004.—The treaty was read the first time, and together with 

the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and order to be printed for the use of the Senate 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(III)

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 

THE WHITE HOUSE, April 19, 2004. 

To the Senate of the United States: 

With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to 

ratification, I transmit herewith the Extradition Treaty Between 

the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great 

Britain and Northern Ireland, and related exchanges of letters, 

signed at Washington on March 31, 2003. 

In addition, I transmit for the information of the Senate the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty. As the 

report explains, the Treaty will not require implementing legislation. 

The provisions in this Treaty follow generally the form and content of modern extradition treaties recently concluded by the 

United States and will replace the outdated extradition treaty 

signed in 1972 and the supplementary treaty signed in 1985 that 

are currently in force between the two countries. The Treaty will, 

upon entry into force, enhance cooperation between the law enforcement communities of the two countries. It will thereby make 

a significant contribution to international law enforcement efforts 

against serious offenses, including terrorism, organized crime, and 

money laundering offenses. 

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification. 

GEORGE W. BUSH. 

(V)

LETTER OF SUBMITTAL 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, October 3, 2003. 

The PRESIDENT, 

The White House. 

THE PRESIDENT: I have the honor to submit to you the Extradition Treaty Between the United States of America and the 

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (‘‘the Treaty’’), and related exchanges of letters, signed at Washington on 

March 31, 2003. Upon its entry into force, the Treaty would replace 

the outdated extradition treaty signed in 1972 and the supplementary treaty signed in 1985 that are now in force between the 

two countries. I recommend that the Treaty, with related exchanges of letters, be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and 

consent to ratification. 

The Treaty follows generally the form and content of other extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States. The Treaty 

represents a major step forward in U.S. efforts to strengthen cooperation with countries in the region in combating terrorism, organized crime, money laundering, and other offenses. It is an important part of a concerted effort by the Department of State and 

the Department of Justice to modernize the legal tools available for 

the extradition of serious offenders. 

The Treaty is designed to be self-executing and will not require 

implementing legislation. 

Article 1 obligates each State to extradite to the other, pursuant 

to the provisions of the Treaty, persons sought by the authorities 

in the Requesting State for trial or punishment for extraditable offenses. 

Article 2 concerns extraditable offenses. Article 2(1) defines an 

offense as extraditable if the conduct on which the offense is based 

is punishable under the laws in both States by deprivation of liberty for a period of one year or more or by a more severe penalty. 

Use of a pure ‘‘dual criminality’’ clause, rather than categories of 

offenses listed in the Treaty plus other offenses that are listed in 

relevant UK extradition law and are considered felonies under U.S. 

law, as in the 1972 extradition treaty, obviates the need to renegotiate or supplement the Treaty as additional offenses become punishable under the laws in both States. Under the 1972 extradition 

treaty, extradition is to be granted if the offense is defined as extraditable under UK law and as a felony under U.S. law, in addition to the requirement that the offense be punishable by imprisonment or other form of detention for more than one year or by the 

death penalty. 

VI

Article 2(2) further defines an extraditable offense as including 

an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, participation in the commission of, aiding or abetting, counseling or procuring the commission 

of, or being an accessory before or after the fact to any offense described in paragraph 1 of Article 2. 

Additional flexibility is provided by Article 2(3), which provides 

that an offense shall be an extraditable offense (a) whether or not 

the laws in the Requesting and Requested States place the offense 

within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the 

same terminology; or (b) whether or not the offense is one for which 

United States federal law requires the showing of such matters as 

interstate transportation, or use of the mails or of other facilities 

affecting interstate or foreign commerce, such matters being jurisdictional only. 

With regard to offenses committed outside the territory of the 

Requesting State, Article 2(4) provides that extradition shall be 

granted in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty if the laws 

in the Requested State provide for the punishment of such conduct 

committed outside its territory in similar circumstances. If the laws 

in the Requested State do not provide for the punishment of such 

conduct committed outside of its territory in similar circumstances, 

the executive authority of the Requested State, in its discretion, 

may grant extradition provided that all other requirements of the 

Treaty are met. 

Finally, Article 2(5) provides that if extradition is granted for an 

extraditable offense, it may also be granted for any other offense 

specified in the request if the latter offense is punishable by less 

than one year’s deprivation of liberty, provided that all other requirements for extradition are met. 

Article 3 provides that extradition shall not be refused based on 

the nationality of the person sought. 

Article 4 sets forth bases for the denial of extradition. As is customary in extradition treaties, paragraph 1 provides that extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is 

requested constitutes a political offense. 

Article 4(2) specifies seven categories of offenses that shall not be 

considered to be political offenses: (a) an offense for which both 

Parties have the obligation pursuant to a multilateral international 

agreement to extradite the person sought or to submit the case to 

their competent authorities for decision as to prosecution; (b) a 

murder or other violent crime against the person of a Head of State 

of one of the Parties, or of a member of the Head of State’s family; 

(c) murder, manslaughter, malicious wounding, or inflicting grievous bodily harm; (d) an offense involving kidnaping, abduction, or 

any form of unlawful detention, including the taking of a hostage; 

(e) placing or using, or threatening the placement or use of, an explosive, incendiary, or destructive device or firearm capable of endangering life, of causing grievous bodily harm, or of causing substantial property damage; (f) possession of an explosive, incendiary, 

or destructive device capable of endangering life, of causing grievous bodily harm, or of causing substantial property damage; and (g) 

an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, participation in the commission of, aiding or abetting, counseling or procuring the commission 

VII

of, or being an accessory before or after the fact to any of the foregoing offenses. 

Article 4(3) requires that, notwithstanding the terms of paragraph 2, extradition shall not be granted if the competent authority 

of the Requested State determines that the request is politically 

motivated. In the United States, the executive branch is the competent authority for the purposes of the Article. Under the 1985 

supplementary treaty, the judicial branch has the authority to consider whether an extradition request is motivated by a desire to 

punish the person sought on account of race, religion, nationality, 

or political opinions, or if the person sought would be subject to unfair treatment in UK courts or prisons after extradition. Like all 

other modern extradition treaties, the new Treaty grants the executive branch rather than the judiciary the authority to determine 

whether a request is politically motivated. 

Article 4(4) provides that the competent authority of the Requested State may also refuse extradition for offenses under military law that are not offenses under ordinary criminal law (e.g., desertion). In the United States, the executive branch is the competent authority for the purposes of the Article. 

Article 5(1) provides that extradition shall not be granted when 

the person sought has been convicted or acquitted in the Requested 

State for the offense for which extradition is requested. Additionally, under paragraph 2, the Requested State may refuse extradition when the person sought has been convicted or acquitted in 

a third state in respect of the conduct for which extradition is 

sought. Article 5(3) provides that extradition shall not be precluded 

by the fact that the competent authorities of the Requested State: 

(a) have decided not to prosecute the person sought for the acts for 

which extradition is requested; (b) have decided to discontinue any 

criminal proceedings that have been instituted against the person 

sought for those acts; or (c) are still investigating the person sought 

for the same acts for which extradition is sought. 

Article 6 provides that the decision by the Requested State 

whether to grant the request for extradition shall be made without 

regard to any statute of limitations in either State. 

Article 7 concerns capital punishment. Under Article 7, when an 

offense for which extradition is sought is punishable by death 

under the laws in the Requesting State but not under the laws in 

the Requested State, the executive authority in the Requested 

State may refuse extradition unless the Requesting State provides 

an assurance that the death penalty will not be imposed or, if imposed, will not be carried out. The United States has agreed to 

similar formulations in other modern extradition treaties (e.g., 

those with France, Poland, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, India, 

and Peru). 

Article 8 establishes the procedures and describes the documents 

that are required to support a request for extradition. All requests 

for extradition shall be submitted through the diplomatic channel. 

Among other requirements, Article 8(3) provides that a request for 

the extradition of a person sought for prosecution must be supported by: (a) a copy of the warrant or order of arrest issued by a 

judge or other competent authority; (b) a copy of the charging document, if any; and (c) for requests to the United States, such inforVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:08 Sep 25, 2006 Jkt 049118 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD023.XXX TD023
VIII

mation as would provide a reasonable basis to believe that the person sought committed the offense for which extradition is sought. 

The Treaty will not change the evidentiary burden required for extradition requests to the United States, but the Treaty’s entry into 

force will allow the United States to take advantage of the United 

Kingdom Extradition Act of 1989, which applies only to treaties 

that enter into force after 1989. Under the 1989 Act, the evidentiary requirements for extradition from the United Kingdom are 

lowered from a ‘‘prima facie’’ standard to ‘‘evidence sufficient for 

issuance of a warrant,’’ which is analogous to the U.S. probable 

cause standard. 

Article 9 establishes the procedures under which documents submitted to support an extradition request shall be deemed to be authentic and received in evidence. 

Under Article 10, if the Requested State requires additional information to enable a decision to be taken on the request for extradition, the Requesting State shall respond to the request within 

such time as the Requested State requires. 

Article 11 provides that all documents submitted under the Treaty by the Requesting State shall be in English or accompanied by 

a translation into English. 

Article 12 sets forth procedures and describes the information 

that is required for the provisional arrest and detention of the person sought, in an urgent situation, pending presentation of the formal request for extradition. In particular, Article 12(4) provides 

that if the Requested State’s executive authority has not received 

the extradition request and supporting documents required by Article 8 within sixty (60) days from the date of provisional arrest, the 

person may be discharged from custody. Article 12(5) explicitly provides that such a discharge from custody shall not prejudice the 

subsequent re-arrest and extradition of that person if the extradition request and supporting documents are delivered at a later 

date. 

Article 13 specifies the procedures governing a decision on the 

extradition request and the surrender of the person sought. It requires the Requested State to promptly notify the Requesting State 

of its decision regarding a request. Such notification should be 

transmitted through the diplomatic channel directly to the competent authority designated by the Requesting State to receive 

such notification. If the request is denied in whole or in part, the 

Requested State must provide reasons for the denial and, upon request, copies of pertinent judicial decisions. If extradition is granted, the States shall agree on the time and place for the surrender 

of the person sought. If the person sought is not removed from the 

territory of the Requested State within the time period prescribed 

by the law of that State, the person may be discharged from custody, and the Requested State, in its discretion, may subsequently 

refuse extradition for the same offense(s). 

Article 14 addresses temporary and deferred surrender. Article 

14(1) provides that if a person whose extradition is sought is being 

proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the Requested State, 

the Requested State may temporarily surrender the person to the 

Requesting State for the purpose of prosecution. If the Requested 

State requests, the Requesting State shall keep the person so surVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:08 Sep 25, 2006 Jkt 049118 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD023.XXX TD023
IX

rendered in custody and shall return that person to the Requested 

State after the conclusion of the proceedings against that person, 

in accordance with conditions to be determined by mutual agreement of the States. Alternatively, under Article 14(2), the Requested State may postpone extradition proceedings against a person who is being prosecuted or who is serving a sentence in that 

State. The postponement may continue until the prosecution of the 

person sought has been concluded or until such person has served 

any sentence imposed. 

Article 15 provides a non-exclusive list of factors to be considered 

by the executive authority of the Requested State in determining 

to which State to surrender a person whose extradition is sought 

by more than one State. 

Article 16 provides that the Requested State may, to the extent 

permitted under its law, seize and surrender to the Requesting 

State all items and assets, including proceeds, that are connected 

with the offense in respect of which extradition is granted. Such 

items and assets may be surrendered even if the extradition cannot 

be carried out due to the death, disappearance, or escape of the 

person sought. The Requested State may condition the surrender 

of the items upon satisfactory assurances that the property will be 

returned to the Requested State as soon as practicable. The Requested State may also defer the surrender of such items if they 

are needed as evidence in the Requested State. 

Article 17 permits surrender as expeditiously as possible and 

without further proceedings if the person sought waives extradition 

and agrees to be surrendered to the Requesting State. 

Article 18 sets forth the rule of specialty under international law. 

Paragraph 1 provides, subject to specific exceptions set forth in 

paragraph 3, that a person extradited under the Treaty may not 

be detained, tried, or punished in the Requesting State except for: 

(a) Any offense for which extradition was granted, or a differently 

denominated offense based on the same facts as the offense for 

which extradition was granted, provided such offense is extraditable, or is a lesser included offense; (b) any offense committed 

after the extradition of the person; or (c) any offense for which the 

executive authority of the Requested State waives the rule of specialty and thereby consents to the person’s detention, trial, or punishment. The treaty currently in place does not contain such a provision for waiver of the rule of specialty, and the preferred practice 

of States is not to waive the rule of specialty unless there is a treaty provision authorizing them to do so. 

Article 18(2) provides that a person extradited under the Treaty 

may not be the subject of onward extradition or surrender for any 

offense committed prior to the extradition to the Requesting State 

unless the Requested State consents. The Treaty’s use of the term 

‘‘surrender’’ (the operable term in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court) makes explicit that the United Kingdom 

will not surrender to the ICC any person extradited by the United 

States. The United Kingdom has recorded in a separate letter its 

understanding that the Treaty continues the protection implicit in 

the current treaty against surrender to the ICC of fugitives extradited by the United States and states in its letter that it will conVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:08 Sep 25, 2006 Jkt 049118 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\TD023.XXX TD023
X

test any request from the ICC for such surrender as being inconsistent with Article 98(2) of the Rome Statute. 

Under Article 18(3), these restrictions shall not prevent the detention, trial, or punishment of an extradited person, or the extradition of a person to a third State, if the extradited person leaves 

the territory of the Requesting State after extradition and voluntarily returns to it or fails to leave the territory of the Requesting 

State within twenty (20) days of being free to do so. 

Article 19 governs the transit through the territory of one State 

of a person being surrendered to the other State by a third State 

or from the other State to a third State. 

Article 20 contains provisions on representation and expenses 

that are similar to those found in other modern U.S. extradition 

treaties. Specifically, the Requested State is required to advise, assist, and appear in court on behalf of the Requesting State in any 

proceedings in the courts of the Requested State arising out of a 

request for extradition or make all necessary arrangements for the 

same. The Requested State also bears all expenses incurred in that 

State in connection with the extradition proceedings, except that 

the Requesting State pays expenses related to the translation of extradition documents and the transportation of the person surrendered. Article 20(3) specifies that neither State shall make any pecuniary claim against the other State arising out of the arrest, detention, examination, or surrender of persons under the Treaty. 

Article 21 provides that the Parties may consult with each other 

in connection with the processing of individual cases and in furtherance of efficient implementation of the Treaty. 

Article 22 concerns the application of the Treaty. Paragraph 1 

makes the Treaty applicable to offenses committed before as well 

as after the date of entry into force. 

Under paragraph Article 22(2), the Treaty shall apply to the 

United States of America and, in relation to the United Kingdom, 

to Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands, the 

Isle of Man, and to any territory for whose international relations 

the United Kingdom is responsible and to which the Treaty has 

been extended by agreement of the Parties. Article 22(3) provides 

that the application of the Treaty to any territory in respect of 

which extension has been made in accordance with paragraph 2 

may be terminated by either State giving six months’ written notice to the other through the diplomatic channel. 

Pursuant to Article 22(4), a request by the United States for the 

extradition of an offender who is found in any of the territories to 

which this Treaty applies in accordance with paragraph 2 of the 

Article may be made to the Governor or other competent authority 

of that territory. A request on the part of any of the territories to 

which this Treaty applies in accordance with paragraph 2 of the 

Article for the extradition of an offender who is found in the United 

States of America may be made to the Government of the United 

States by the Governor or other competent authority of that territory. This paragraph streamlines the extradition procedures regarding requests to and from UK territories, as such requests currently must go through the United Kingdom’s central authority in 

London. 

XI

Article 23 contains clauses dealing with the Treaty’s ratification 

and entry into force. Paragraphs 1 and 2 provide that the Treaty 

is subject to ratification and will enter into force upon the exchange 

of instruments of ratification, which is to take place as soon as possible. 

Article 23(3) provides that, upon entry into force of the Treaty, 

the Extradition Treaty signed at London on June 8, 1972, and the 

Supplementary Treaty signed at Washington on June 25, 1985, (together ‘‘the prior Treaty’’) shall cease to have any effect as between 

the United States and the United Kingdom, subject to certain exceptions. The prior Treaty shall apply to any extradition proceedings in which the extradition documents have already been 

submitted to the courts of the Requested State at the time the 

Treaty enters into force, except that Article 18 of this Treaty relating to the rule of specialty shall apply to persons found extraditable 

under the prior Treaty. The prior Treaty shall also apply to any 

territory to which it has been extended in accordance with Article 

II of that Treaty, until such time as the provisions of this Treaty 

have been extended to such a territory under Article 22(2). 

Article 24 provides that either State may terminate the Treaty 

at any time by giving written notice to the other State through the 

diplomatic channel. Such termination shall be effective six months 

after the date of receipt of such notice. 

The Department of Justice joins the Department of State in favoring approval of this Treaty by the Senate at the earliest possible 

date. 

Respectfully submitted. 

COLIN L. POWELL. 

(1) 


Insert graphic folio 1980 TD23.001
2 


Insert graphic folio 1981 TD23.002
3 


Insert graphic folio 1982 TD23.003
4 


Insert graphic folio 1983 TD23.004
5 


Insert graphic folio 1984 TD23.005
6 


Insert graphic folio 1985 TD23.006
7 


Insert graphic folio 1986 TD23.007
8 


Insert graphic folio 1987 TD23.008
9 


Insert graphic folio 1988 TD23.009
10 


Insert graphic folio 1989 TD23.010
11 


Insert graphic folio 1990 TD23.011
12 


Insert graphic folio 1991 TD23.012
13 


Insert graphic folio 1992 TD23.013
14 


Insert graphic folio 1993 TD23.014
15 


Insert graphic folio 1994 TD23.015
16 


Insert graphic folio 1995 TD23.016
17 


Insert graphic folio 1996 TD23.017
18 


Insert graphic folio 1997 TD23.018
19 


Insert graphic folio 1998/2010 TD23.019