DOJ-OGR-00002138.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 97-22 Filed 12/14/20 Page 14 of 30 William JULIE avocat a la cour — attorney at law Part II — The likely outcome of an extradition request from the United States of America to France in the case of Ms Ghislaine Maxwell 33. In this case, if an extradition request were to be transmitted by the USA against Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, the French judicial authorities would most certainly decide that she has to remain in custody given her flight from the USA and the violation of her bail terms and conditions in this requesting State. 34. Having outlined the different stages of the French extradition procedure, the second part of this opinion will examine the likely outcome of an extradition request against the person of Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, if she were to be released on bail and decided to flee from the USA to France. It will first outline the general bars to extradition (A), and then analyze the status of the protection of nationals from extradition in the French legal system and in the Extradition Treaty between the USA and France (B). It will conclude that Ms Ghislaine Maxwell’s extradition from France to the USA would not be legally barred by her French citizenship, and that it is highly unlikely, under the specific and unique circumstances of this case, that French authorities will refuse to enforce an extradition decree. A. General bars to extradition 35. Several bars to extradition may classically be invoked before French courts, namely (i) a claim that the requested person would be at risk of human rights violations in the requesting State (with regards to the right to a fair trial and the right to be free from torture, inhumane or degrading treatment); (11) the dual criminality rule; and (iii) a claim that the extradition request is politically motivated. (i) Human rights bars 36. Under the case law of the French Cour de cassation, the Investigating Chamber of the Court of appeal must consider allegations of human rights violations pertaining to the conditions of trial and detention in the requesting State!’. These claims center on the right to a fair trial (Article 6 ECHR)!° and the right to be free from torture, inhumane 5 Cass. Crim., 26 March 2019, nNo. 19-81731. 16 Einhorn v. France, 16/10/2001, Application No. 71555/01. 51, rue Ampére - 75017 paris - tél. 01 88 33 51 80 — fax. 01 88 33 51 81 wj@wjavocats.com - 13 www.wjavocats.com - palais C1652 DOJ-OGR- 00002138