BY FRANCIS JOSEPH
The High Court has permanently stayed the extradition proceedings against former FIFA Vice-President, Dr Austin Jack Warner.In a 71-page judgment delivered on Friday morning, Madame Justice Karen Reid ruled in favour of the former Government Minister, putting an end to ten years of legal battles which even reached the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.It was in 2015 that the United States requested the extradition of Warner to face trial in the United States on 29 charges of fraud, corruption, racketeering, and money laundering. When the request came, Warner surrendered himself to the police and was granted bail and released.Appearing for Warner in his constitutional challenge were
Fyard Hosein SC, Rishi Dass SC, Sasha Bridgemohansingh and Aadam Hosein instructed by Anil Maraj The Attorney General was represented by English lawyer, Robert Strang instructed by Sheriza Khan.
A the centre of the battle was a non-existent “certificate of specialty”, – a required document detailing exactly which charges Warner could face in the US was missing.
THE DECISION
The Court ordered the following:(1) It is declared that the issuance of an Authority to Proceed in the absence of an arrangement with the Requesting State that guarantees the protections on specialty required under section 8(3) of the Extradition (Commonwealth and Foreign Territories) Act, Chap. 12:04 constituted a breach of the Claimant’s right to liberty. (2) It is declared that falsely representing to the courts in previous Warner cases that a special or bespoke arrangement on specialty had been entered into between the US and the Trinidad and Tobago regarding Warner constituted a breach of Warner’s (3) It is declared that continuing the extradition proceedings against Warner following the proceedings in Privy Council in which the Attorney General falsely represented that a special or bespoke arrangement on specialty had been entered into between the US and Trinidad and Tobago regarding Warner and wrongfully obtaining an order permitting the continuation of the same on the basis, constituted a breach of the his right to liberty and his right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law. (4) It is declared that the continuation of extradition proceedings against Warner in the absence of an arrangement between the US and Trinidad and Tobago that guarantees the protections on specialty required under constituted a breach of the his right to liberty.(5) An Order that the extradition proceedings against Warner
be permanently stayed. (6) The AG shall pay to Warner damages in respect of the breaches of his constitutional rights.
(7) The AG shall pay to Warner his costs certified fit for Senior and Junior Counsel. (8) The assessment of damages is fixed for case management conference on 30 September, 2026 at 1:30 p.m.
THE JUDGMENT
According to Justice Reid, those extradition proceedings have a long and storied history beginning in 2015 with the issuing of a Provisional Warrant for Warner’s arrest on 27 May, 2015 in relation to certain money laundering offences in the United States of America involving certain alleged activities of Warner and other persons associated with FIFA. Warner surrendered the same day and was released on bail the next day on the 28th of May, 2015. On the 16th of July, 2015, a request for Warner’s extradition was made. On the 21st September, 2015, the then Attorney General, Faris Al Rawi, issued an Authority to Proceed (ATP) pursuant to section 9 of the Extradition (Commonwealth and Foreign Territories) Act, which authorized the commencement of the formal extradition proceedings before the Magistrate.On the 27th of November, 2015, Warner commenced judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of the ATP. Those proceedings were dismissed by the trial judge on the 27th of September, 2017. Warner appealed against the trial judge’s order, and that appeal was subsequently dismissed by the Court of Appeal on the 11th of June, 2019. The Court of Appeal’s order was then appealed and dismissed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on the 17th of December, 2022, making way for the resumption of the extradition proceedings before the Magistrate. The extradition proceedings then recommenced before the then Chief Magistrate, following which Warner made an application on the 3rd of March, 2023 to refer certain constitutional questions to the High Court. These constitutional questions concerned what Warner alleged were breaches of his constitutional rights. After filing his application for leave to bring a claim for judicial review, the Attorney General objected and an inter-partes hearing was held on the 17th of December, 2015. At that hearing, Counsel for the AG indicated that there was a specialty arrangement entered into between the USA and Trinidad and Tobago regarding Warner and offered to disclose a copy of the same. On the 18th of December, 2015, Warner’s Counsel followed up by letter requesting disclosure of the said specialty arrangement “at the very earliest opportunity”. By letter dated the 28th of December, 2015, instructing Attorney for the AG purported to supply a copy of the specialty arrangement. What was in fact supplied was a copy of a certificate dated the 21st of September, 2015 and signed by then-Attorney General Faris Al Rawi which stated, “I hereby certify under the authority of the Attorney General that an arrangement has been made in pursuance of section 8(3) of that Act with the Government of the United States of America in the case of JACK WARNER that if he is returned to the United States of America, JACK WARNER will not until he has left or has been free to leave the United States of America, be dealt with in the United States of America for or in respect of any offence committed.”By letter of the 13th of January, 2016, Warner’s lawyer advised that the document disclosed was not a copy of the specialty arrangement, but merely a certificate indicating that a specialty arrangement exists, and called upon the AG to disclose a copy of the actual specialty arrangement. Well, that never turned up because there was none.In her judgment, Justice Reid said, “
What occurred was a course of misrepresentation that ultimately deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to avail himself of the prompt and effective remedy available to him to challenge the ATP and to obtain relief. Moreover, the conduct of the Office of the Defendant (AG) in failing to correct the record when it was known to be incorrect and then in positively making a representation to the Board (Privy Council) that was long since known to be false was not only a breach of the Defendant’s duty of candour but a serious dereliction of duty as the guardian of the public interest and an abuse of the process of the Court.”She continued, “
As to the dereliction of duty, the seriousness of the conduct here cannot be overstated. It is not simply the case that the Defendant has a duty of candour in public law cases. The duty of candour is important and is expected of the Defendant.” She referred to the decision in the Brent Thomas case.Justice Reid added, “As to the abuse of process, it is without a doubt an abuse of the Court’s process to lead false evidence or to make representations to the Court that are known to be false in order to influence the outcome of the proceedings. As set out above, I do not find that at the time the Certificate of Specialty was issued that the then Attorney General was then certifying the existence of a bespoke specialty arrangement in respect of the Claimant that did not exist. At the time, the certificate would have been referring to the arrangement in the Treaty.
