DOJ-OGR-00002796.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document171 Filed 03/23/21 Page 16of18 17. 18. 19, 20 Als Doon WILLIAM JULIE AVOCAT A LA COUR — ATTORNEY AT LAW This concern over opportunistic nationality applications is precisely the justification of the rule mentioned in academic literature (see for example Répertoire de droit pénal et de procédure pénale Extradition Pén. — Conditions de fond de l'extradition — Delphine Brach-Thiel-October 2018, §59). Third, the French Ministry of Justice’s interpretation is contradicted by precedents and case law The French Ministry of Justice’s interpretation finds no support in case law, as no case can be found where Article 696-4 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure was applied to protect a formerly French national from extradition. Instead, precedents exist in which Article 696-4,1° of the French Code of Criminal Procedure was relied on by French authorities to execute an extradition request against an individual who had acquired French nationality after committing an offence, which is the natural use of this provision (for example, a ruling issued by the Criminal Chamber of the French Cour de cassation on 4 January 2006, n°05-86.258). Although we have found no precedent where French authorities were faced with the extradition of a person who had lost French nationality, we have found cases where French authorities were faced with the deportation of a person who had lost French nationality. Both extradition and deportation allow for the removal of a person from French territory by the police and its surrender to the authorities of a third State, with the consent and cooperation of the authorities of that State. The European Court of Human Rights (the “ECtHR”’) treats extradition and deportation analogously. More specifically, the ECtHR considers that the same human rights bars apply to all types of removal of a person from the territory of a State party (“the Court considers that the question whether there is a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 in another State cannot depend on the legal basis for removal to that State. The Court’s own case-law has shown that, in practice, there may be little difference between 4 51, RUE AMPERE - 75017 PARIS - TEL. O1 88 33 Si 8O- FAX. Oi 88 33 5i BI wj@wjavocats.com - www.wjavocats.com - PALAIS C1652 DOJ-OGR- 00002796