There have been a few extradition cases in the UK in 2012 which have caused heated debate. Some have involved British Citizens being extradited to the US. One man who was extradited was retired UK businessman Christopher Tappin. In most of the cases the person alleged of wrongdoing has had to plead guilty in order to escape a life term in a US prison. It has raised many concerns regarding the UK / US extradition treaty.

One qeustion in many of the cases is why can the person not be charged in the UK?. These people have not committed any crime on US soil and for some such as Richard O'Dwyer the offence was a "virtual" one.

British authorities have been trying to rid the UK of Muslim Cleric Abu Hamza for more years that they care to remember. Finally his extradition to the USA is on the cards. Hamza tried every means open to him to prevent his extradition. The latest has been an appeal by representatives insisting that he needs medical diagnostic tests before he is extradited. The judge was not having any more of this though and ruled that such tests, if they are necessary, can be carried out in the US.

Four more men will be extradited with Hamza. All are often referred to as terror suspects. These are Babar Ahmad, Syed Talha Ahsan, Adel Abdul Bary and Khaled al-Fawwaz. Judges have decided that there is no new nor compelling evidence which would halt extradition proceedings.

The extradition proceedings will now get under way. According to the BBC this is what will happen next:

• Met Police Extradition Unit officers take custody of detainees at Long Lartin prison
• Detainees taken to secure location for legal handover to US Marshals Service
• Detainees loaded onto aircraft from US Marshals Alien Transport System
• Flight to US
• Trials at later date

Trials at a later date? When, considering the timescale so far? Where? An open civilian court of law?

The family of Babar Ahmad, a UK citizen, have voiced their frustration at his possible extradition. His case is somewhat different to that of Abu Hamza. Babar and his family have pressed for a trial in the UK. Our earlier report included the following which was from a BBC report: "The Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service have denied impropriety. The unprecedented interview in the maximum security Long Lartin Prison came after the BBC challenged a government ban on filming Mr Ahmad. The High Court ruled that there was an overwhelming public interest in hearing Mr Ahmad discuss his case, because of his unique situation.

"I have been in prison now for nearly eight years without trial," Mr Ahmad said. "I am facing extradition to the US to spend the rest of my life in solitary confinement. I have never been questioned about the allegations against me. "I do not hold the Americans responsible for anything that has happened to me, but I think it is fair to say that I am fighting for my life - and I am running out of time."

The 37-year-old from Tooting in south London was arrested in 2004 on an extradition warrant from the United States.The BBC fought a High Court battle to allow Mr Ahmad to be interviewed. US prosecutors say he headed a terrorist "support cell" in London through a website called Azzam.com. He faces life imprisonment if convicted. Scotland Yard had arrested Mr Ahmad the previous year, but released him without charge."

Since when did the UK not try suspects? Mr Ahmad's father has said that his son should face trial in the UK. The only link to the US appears to be that the website was hosted in the USA. How can people be held for such long periods of time with no trial?? No hard evidence? No proof of guilt?

The UK and British people pride themselves on the excellent legal processes the country abides by. What is so different in the case of Babar Hamad?

More Here

Read an exclusive report in the Independent here

Update:
Around 19:15pm Friday October 5, the men were all taken by police escort from Long Lartin prison to RAF Mildenhall. The men are expected to be handed over to US marshals waiting there. According to the BBC "A US Department of Justice-owned civilian Gulfstream jet," has been waiting since Tuesday of this week. As all the men should be facing a civilian court no army officers should be present.

Wikieaks founder Julian Assange is wanted in Sweden for alleged sexual crimes which occurred almost two years ago. He stands charged of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion, involving two women. Mr Assange has denied any wrong doing and has continued to fight his extradition.

If the allegations are true the two women have been badly let down by the justice system. If they are not Mr Assange could find himself caught in an ever increasing web.

It is no secret that the USA would like to get their hands on Assange. His published wikileaks revealed far more than US officials wanted as public knowledge. One casualty of this affair has been Bradley Manning. His fate remains uncertain.

Assange has continued to maintain that the allegations from Sweden are all a ploy. Once in Sweden he thinks the US will easily be able to move him to that country. Either that or he will face a long sentece in Sweden for something he claims he did not do.

The latest twist in Mr Assanges complicated and controversial llfe happened last night, June 19, 2012, when he entered the Equadorean Embassy in London. His reason for doing so was to request asylum.

In doing so he breached his bail conditions and now faces arrest by UK police should he leave the building.  Officials at the embassy have said that they must give Assange's request the necssary attention. This is common practice in embassies. Assange could have waitied until a time of day when he had some freedom but he choose to enter the embassy at night.

Recently Julian had interviewed the leader of Equador as part of his new role on RT, Russia Today. Is this when he conceived the plan? How safe he would be in Equador is uncertain.

The Guardian has reported "Brita Sundberg-Weitman, a former head judge at a district court in Solna, a Stockholm suburb, who gave evidence in Assange's appeal against extradition in the UK courts, said she feared Assange's decision to seek refuge in Ecuador was misguided. "I can understand that Assange is afraid of being sent from Sweden to the US, but I am not sure it will turn out well for him," she said."I don't know what his situation would be if he really landed in Ecuador and whether he would be safe. If you think of the policy of the Obama administration to kill whoever the president considers a terrorist wherever they are in the world."

Last week Assange's appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected. This meant that extradition was imminent. Perhaps seeking asylum was simply a last ditch effort of a desperate man? Then again it could have been more contrived.

65-year-old British business Christopher Tappin has been extradited from the UK today, February 24, 2012. It is alleged that he illegally exported weapons parts to Iran. It is claimed that there is a strong case against Mr Tappin who was apparently caught out in a US sting operation. Tappin maintained that the parts he was exporting were to be used in cars.

This article though is not so much about his alleged crimes but more about the injustice in the UK which leaves one of its citizens able to be extradited in such a way.

Mr Tappin has already drawn parallels between his case and that of foreign national Abu Qatada. Qatada is wanted in Jordan to face charges but his deportation to that country has been stopped by the EU court of Human Rights. Qatada is a citizen of Jordan whilst Mr Tappin is a British citizen who down the years has been a law abiding taxpayer. No such respite for him. Human rights courts have agreed to his deportation whist Qatada remains in the UK costing the country an estimated £10,000 a week.
Qatada has made his feelings about the UK and its citizens plain yet we continue to pussyfoot around him.

Mr Tappin is at a time in his life when he should be looking toward a quiet retirement. Mr Tappin cares for his wife Elaine. She has chronic Churg-Strauss Syndrome. Elaine tearfully went to the airport with her husband today.He was handcuffed and seated with two US Marshalls for his flight over to the US. Way to go US. Over the top as always. 

UK media reports today have carried this story and plenty of UK judges have shared their thoughts on this case. As they have said in the UK you are innocent until proven guilty. As soon as Mr Tappin set foot on the plane to the US today he was assumed guilty. 

What galls most is the US ridiculous plea bargaining system. Many other UK citizens extradited to the US have faced a threatened sentence of perhaps even 700 years in jail plus possible bankruptcy if their case fails as opposed to a couple of years in jail if they "cop a plea" or plea bargain.  Which would you choose? Obviously most people plea bargain as the only sensible way to guarantee returning home .However this means they cannot prove their innocence and neither can they have a fair trial with witness evidence. 

SkyNews has reported that at the airport Mr Tappin said he was not confident at all. He went on to say, "I won't be given leave to get any of my witnesses who are based in the UK because they are not allowed to testify in America by virtue of the fact they do not allow video interrogation. They have to appear personally. Unfortunately they will not appear in America so I don't know. I have certainly got enough facts to support my case but without the witnesses, their testimony, it's going to be very difficult. If I wanted anything, it was to be tried in the UK, not in America, because the Americans have never had to produce one piece of evidence. All the evidence shown to the court so far has come from our side. They have not had to produce any evidence whatsoever. We believe there is no evidence ... it's just an accusation. By virtue of an accusation they are allowed to extradite people from one country to another."

And why should he not face a UK court here in Great Britain? There was never a hope in mounting a winnable legal challenge against this man's extradition due to a treaty between the US and the UK which has been in operation since 2003. When he was in opposition David Cameron insisted that he would get this treaty changed or withdraw the UK from it. As yet he and his government have done nothing to improve the situation. 

As Mr Tappin said today,  "I was born in this country, I'm a taxpayer in this country, why can't you look after me? I need your protection."It's the one time in my life that I need your protection, yet you let me go into a brutal system which I don't know if I'll ever survive." Any UK judge is powerless in such a case. Basically if the information used for extradition satisfies the terms of the treaty, there's very little discretion for the Home Secretary, a minister, or the courts. 

US plea bargaining bears no relation to that in the UK. It would not be allowed in the same format in the UK. Added to this Mr Tappin looks set to be held in a Federal prison. Foreigners always are in the US in case they might try to flee the country. The family home is being sold to fund his legal costs. He faces a possible 35 year sentence if convicted which for him would be a life jail sentence. Obviously he will have to take the plea bargain option.

As more and more UK citizens are facing the gung ho attitude of the US it seemed likely that an E Petition ought to be started online. Checking the government website there is already one in place. The number of signatures right now is low.  The petition will be linked here and displayed on TEKJournalismUK for the foreseeable future. We should be looking to ourselves as well as hoping that justice is served for Mr Tappin. The might of the UK population needs to be thrown behind the petition to force the UK Parliament to debate this treaty and do the right thing.

Good luck is sent to the Tappin family.
Opinion:  Hilary Clintomn has been keen to ensure that Tappin is extradited to the US. He is charged with exporting batteries which could be used in Hawk air defence missiles. Hypocrisy from the so called Land of the Free. Is there any wonder that the US has become so hated around the world?
The Online petition asks to 
Withdraw from the Extradition Treaty with the United StatesResponsible department: Home Office
We call on parliament to immediately withdraw from the current Extradition Treaty with the United States until the following conditions are met:

-Equality in terms of strength of evidence with regards extradition of US citizens to the UK and from UK citizens to the US 
-No extradition for crimes not commited on American soil 
-The standard of evidence must be high enough for the Crown Prosecution Service to make a charge in the UK for extradition to take place. 
-The standards of prisoner treatment and sentencing meets the standards of the UK Human Rights Act.
If you agree please visit the petition and sign here