The Judgment No. 26647 of 2024 on the Assessment of the Flight Risk in Extradition

The recent judgment no. 26647 of May 30, 2024, issued by the Court of Appeal of Palermo, addressed a crucial issue in the context of precautionary measures in passive extradition procedures. The case in question concerns the defendant G. C. and provides important guidance on how the judge should assess the flight risk, a fundamental aspect in deciding on the application of coercive measures.

The Legal Context

In general, the flight risk is a determining element in precautionary measures, especially in extradition situations. The Court, in its ruling, reiterated that the assessment of such risk must be based on criteria of concreteness and timeliness. This means that the judge must analyze the personal situation of the extraditee, considering specific and tangible factors that may justify a risk of escape.

The Maxim of the Judgment

Flight risk - Definition - Assessment - Case. In the context of coercive measures ordered within a passive extradition procedure, the requirements of concreteness and timeliness of the flight risk must be evaluated by the judge with regard to the purpose of the surrender, to which the procedure is preordained, and thus according to a prognostic judgment, anchored to concrete elements drawn from the life of the extraditee, regarding the risk that they may evade, distancing themselves from the national territory. (Case in which the flight risk was inferred from the ways in which the extraditee had clandestinely moved from one continent to another, under extremely difficult conditions and exposing themselves to very high risks for their safety).

This maxim highlights the importance of a prognostic judgment based on concrete elements. The Court emphasized that the assessment cannot be merely abstract but must take into account real and documented factors, as in the specific case where the extraditee demonstrated a certain propensity to move clandestinely, exposing themselves to considerable risks.

Assessment Elements

For judges, the factors to consider in the assessment of the flight risk include:

  • The methods of movement of the extraditee, particularly if carried out clandestinely.
  • The living conditions and stability of the extraditee's residence.
  • Any previous instances of escape or behaviors that may suggest an intention to evade justice.

The Court clarified that these elements must be evaluated in light of the purposes of extradition, namely to ensure the presence of the extraditee during the judicial proceedings.

Conclusions

The judgment no. 26647 of 2024 represents an important guide for legal professionals, highlighting the necessity of a thorough and concrete analysis of the flight risk in extradition contexts. The Court of Appeal of Palermo has provided useful legal tools for the assessment of such situations, emphasizing that decisions must always be anchored to factual data and the realities of the extraditee's life. This approach not only protects the rights of the individual but also ensures the effectiveness of international justice procedures.

Bianucci Law Firm