On 20 October 2020, the High Court dismissed Romanian national Bogan Alexander Adamescu’s appeal against a decision of District Judge Zani, sitting at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, not to discharge him from extradition proceedings and that he be returned to Romania on charges of bribing judges. Mr Adamescu’s legal team argued that his extradition should be barred on the grounds that his prosecution was political and that extradition would breach his rights under Articles 3 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibit inhuman or degrading treatment and guarantee the right to a fair trial, respectively.
Dismissing the appeal, the High Court found that the District Judge’s decision had not been wrong. The court was not persuaded by Mr Adamescu’s assertion that his prosecution was politically motivated and the expert evidence submitted in support of this claim failed to address the evidence in support of the charges against Mr Adamescu. Rejecting the human rights grounds of appeal, the court stated that the assurances provided by the Romanian government in respect of the conditions in which Mr Adamescu would be held were sufficient to address the Article 3 concerns, and in relation to the Article 6 challenge, Romania benefitted from a presumption that it would comply with its obligations.
The next stage in proceedings is for the case to be sent to the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) for a decision on whether or not to order extradition. In the wake of the judgment, a number of high profile individuals, including Sir Graham Brady, head of the 1922 committee, have called on the SSHD to “look very carefully at this particular case.”