Hello,
We've been contacted by the human rights group Liberty to see whether we can support their efforts to stop a woman called Eileen Clark from being extradited to the USA to stand trial for international parental kidnapping.
You can read more about the background details here and here, but here's an edited version:
In 1986 Eileen married John Clark. The relationship quickly descended into serious psychological control, threats of violence and many occasions of physical violence. After almost ten years, Eileen took her three children and moved to California, then eventually moved back to the UK. In her absence, her husband divorced her and took proceedings against her for custody of the children. Eileen was charged with a state-level offence called 'custodial interference'.
In 2008, the state authorities in the US became aware that Eileen was in the UK. The federal authorities stepped in - Liberty believes following behind-the-scenes pressure from John Clark - and effectively upgraded the charges to something called 'international parental kidnapping', which carries a prison sentence of up to 3 years.
In 2010, a formal extradition request was made. Eileen tried to appeal against the extradition order through the British courts but her appeal was dismissed. The very strong and compelling evidence that Eileen was a victim of serious domestic violence and abuse was not properly considered by the courts in this country.
Liberty took on the case after Eileen had exhausted her appeal rights. Liberty says it has been shocked to discover the extent of the evidence of domestic abuse and even more shocked to learn that the British courts have not been able to look at this evidence.
According to Liberty, it is the Extradition Act 2003 which has allowed this case to get so far. It says that the Act has removed huge swathes of judicial discretion to prevent extradition from taking place where, for example, it is not in the interests of justice. All that remains now is for Eileen to make representations to the Home Secretary that her removal should be blocked on human rights grounds.
As ever, we'd be interested to hear what you think.
Thanks,
MNHQ