Mygripe The debate on the Christopher “Dudus” Coke extradition issue continues althoughthe Extradition Order signed by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General Senator Dorothy Lightbourne has been executed and Coke is now in the USA awaiting trial which starts next month.
There have been charges that the extradition was delayed by the Government of Jamaica. As to what extent is uncertain. A blow-by-blow account of the beginning is presented in this column.
On August 25, 2009 the US Government requested the extradition of Christopher Coke pursuant to the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Jamaica.
By diplomatic note dated September 18, 2009 the GOJ, as it was entitled to do under the treaty, requested additional information about the evidence and charges outlined in the authenticated document. The additional information sought was, inter alia, the identity of the cooperating witnesses, other evidence (if any) which was presented to the Grand Jury, independent evidence (preferably scientific) that the substance alleged was indeed cocaine and whether Coke had ever visited the US. The GOJ’s preliminary view was that the evidence presented was not sufficient to justify the issue of warrant for the arrest of Coke as required by the Act.
On October 2, 2009, the US responded stating that no further information would be provided and urged the GOJ to place the matter in the local courts. The GOJ on October 30, 2009 sought further information as to how the US obtained possession of “intercepted communications” which were the subject of an Order by Jamaica’s Supreme Court in particular, whether a request was made under the provisions of the Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act (MACMA).
In December, at the request of the US, representatives of the GOJ and the US met at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade on December 1, 2009. America was represented by the chargé d’affaires and a representative of the US Embassy. The GOJ was represented by Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade Kenneth Baugh; Minister of Justice and Attorney General Senator Dorothy Lightbourne, Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade Evadne Coye, and Solicitor General Douglas Leys. At this meeting, the GOJ outlined the legal concerns it had about the request. The US delivered a letter in response to the GOJ’s letter of October 30, 2009. This letter stated that MACMA was not the exclusive means of obtaining such evidence and that the evidence had been obtained in accordance with the mutual understandings arrived at between the Jamaican and United States law enforcement authorities; and it again urged the GOJ to place the matter before a committing magistrate. The meeting ended with an agreement that as there were several legal issues raised which could not be dealt with competently by the representatives of the US, it would be best if the legal representatives of Jamaica meet with legal representatives of the State
Department in Washington DC with a view to discussing the legal issues. The chargé d’ affaires agreed to arrange this meeting.
A joint lawyers’ meeting was held on December 17, 2009 between legal representatives of the GOJ and legal representatives of the US State and Justice departments. At the end of this meeting both parties agreed that each would examine the legal issues with a view to seeing how they could be resolved. The agreement, as reflected in a note prepared by the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, was as follows:
* Solicitor General Douglas Leys and Director Mary Ellen Warlow would remain in direct fluid communication.
* The Department of Justice, USA, would review its records in order to identify the Jamaican source by which the wiretap evidence against Coke was conveyed to the United States and inform the Solicitor General.
* The Ministry of Justice, Jamaica would resume its own internal investigation with a view to determining which office authorised the transfer of the intercept evidence to the USA.
* The Department of Justice would advise the solicitor general as to whether there was evidence other than that acquired by wiretap which could successfully be brought against Christopher Coke in court. Mygripe
Be the first to comment