Bartomiej Glanda v Polish Judicial Authority
[2024] EWHC 1025 (Admin)
Arkadiusz Krampa v Regional Court in Gdansk (Poland)
29 June 2023
[2023] EWHC 1587 (Admin)
High Court
A man wanted in Poland for past crimes tried to avoid extradition by claiming he'd be tortured in a Polish prison. The judge looked at the evidence of prison violence, but said it wasn't enough to stop his extradition because Poland is actively investigating the abuse claims.
Key Facts
- •Arkadiusz Krampa (Appellant), aged 43, is wanted for extradition to Poland to serve the remainder of a 6-year 6-month sentence for fraud and robbery.
- •He was arrested in the UK in July 2022 and a District Judge ordered his extradition in November 2022.
- •The Appellant's initial Article 8 ECHR appeal was abandoned.
- •The current appeal rests on an Article 3 ECHR argument based on alleged fresh evidence of violence by prison officers at Barczewo Prison in Poland.
- •Fresh evidence includes reports from the Polish national mechanism for the prevention of torture (KMPT) and other publications detailing alleged incidents of ill-treatment.
Legal Principles
Displacement Threshold: Exceptional circumstances must be demonstrated to displace the presumption that a Council of Europe state will not subject a person to Article 3 ill-treatment. Evidence must be objective, reliable, specific, and updated.
Litwinczuk v Poland [2021] EWHC 2735 (Admin)
Aranyosi Threshold: If substantial grounds exist to believe a person faces a real risk of Article 3 ill-treatment, the extraditing court must give the requesting state an opportunity to address the risk.
Litwinczuk v Poland [2021] EWHC 2735 (Admin)
Even human rights violations are not, in themselves, evidence that a particular individual would be at risk of future violations.
Miklis v Lithuania [2006] EWHC 1032 (Admin)
Article 3 thresholds for resisting extradition based on ill-treatment are robust and exacting.
This judgment
Outcomes
Permission to amend grounds of appeal refused.
The evidence presented does not arguably cross the Displacement or Aranyosi Thresholds; there is no substantial risk of Article 3 breaches.
Permission to adduce fresh evidence refused.
The evidence, while concerning, does not meet the legal threshold for preventing extradition.
Permission to appeal refused.
The appeal lacks a realistic prospect of success.
Extension of representation order refused.
No justification for further investigation or delay; sufficient material already obtained and considered.
Similar Cases
Norbert Miernik v Sad Okregowy III Criminal Division In Kielce, Poland
[2024] EWHC 1457 (Admin)
Arkadiusz Rozwens v Circuit Court in Lodz, Poland
[2024] EWHC 624 (Admin)
Marek Pawlowski v Regional Court in Tarnow, Poland
[2023] EWHC 2320 (Admin)
Jacek Smolarek v Polish Judicial Authority
[2023] EWHC 2860 (Admin)