Information Note on the Court’s case-law 7

June 1999

Gonzalez v. Spain (dec.) - 43544/98

Decision 29.6.1999 [Section IV]

Article 5

Article 5-1-f

Extradition

Time-limit for State to present request for extradition: inadmissible

The applicant, a US citizen, was charged with drug trafficking by a Federal Court of Florida. On 5 February 1997, he was arrested in Madrid pursuant to an international arrest warrant re questing his detention and extradition to the USA. Thus, in accordance with the Extradition Act and the Extradition Treaty between Spain and the USA, the Audiencia Nacional ordered the applicant’s detention. On 14 February 1997, his detention was notified to the US embassy, which produced a verbal note on 24 March 1997 requesting his extradition; the extradition documents were received on 1 April 1997. On 26 March 1997 the Audiencia Nacional extended his detention for 40 days. The applicant appealed against this decision and asked to be released, submitting that the extradition documents had not been received within the legal time-limit of 45 days following arrest. On 31 March 1998, the Audiencia Nacional pointed out that the time-limit did not start running from the day of arrest but from the notification of arrest to the embassy. The US embassy’s verbal note had hence been issued within the time-limit and his appeal was dismissed. The applicant’s further appeals, including before the Constitutional Court, w ere to no more avail.

Inadmissible under Article 5 § 1 (f): The review of the lawfulness of the detention of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to extradition is limited to examining whether there is a legal basis for the detention and whether the decision to place this person in detention may not be described as arbitrary in the light of the facts of the case. In ordering the applicant’s detention with a view to his extradition, the Audiencia Nacional followed a procedure in accordance with domestic law, i.e. the Act on Extradition and the Extradition Treaty between Spain and the USA. In so far as the applicant complained that the US authorities had not made the extradition request within the 45-day period prescribed by law, the Audienc ia Nacional specified that the time-limit started running from the day of the notification of the arrest to the requesting State and not the day of arrest. Thus, the US authorities’ request had been made on time. Furthermore, decisions taken in the proceed ings against the applicant provided ample justifications for his continued detention: manifestly ill-founded.

Inadmissible under Article 6 § 1: The applicant was able to seek judicial review of the extradition request and the proceedings before the Audienc ia Nacional did not disclose any element of unfairness. Even assuming that Article 6 § 1 was applicable, the applicant’s complaint was in any case inadmissible: manifestly ill-founded.

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes