Chapter 6

Categorisation of countries

The importance of categorisation

6.12The main reason for categorisation is to allow for different processes and standards to apply to different countries. The alternative would be to treat extradition requests from all countries in the same manner. New Zealand could do this in one of two ways, but we find neither to be suitable. First, it could follow the Australian approach, which, by default, requires no court investigation into the evidence of the case against the person sought. Alternatively, it could maximise protection for the individual by providing a relatively formal, full process for all extradition requests, no matter where they come from.

6.13Instead, we propose that categorisation of countries is retained in the new Extradition Act and that the Act should provide for how those categories should be treated differently. In the following chapters, we discuss the aspects of the extradition process that may differ on the basis of a country’s categorisation. These relate to:

• the extent to which the court should inquire into the case against the person sought for extradition;
• if it does inquire into the case, to what standard the court needs to be convinced;
• on what evidence the court should rely; and
• the grounds for refusal.

6.14Categorisation of the country could also influence:

• which organisation receives the extradition request – extradition requests from Category 1 countries could be received directly by the Police, rather than through the central authority, as is the case currently with Part 4 Countries; and
• which offences are extradition offences – Category 1 countries could be exempted from either the maximum penalty threshold or the dual criminality test aspects of the “extradition offence” definition or from both.