JUDGMENT

Lord Templeman

My Lords,

I have had the advantage of reading the speech of my noble and learned friend, Lord Goff of Chieveley. I agree with the reasons given for having allowed the appeal.

Lord Roskill

My Lords,

I have had the advantage of reading the speech of my noble and learned friend, Lord Goff of Chieveley. I too agree with the reasons given for having allowed the appeal.

Lord Bridge of Harwich

My Lords,

I have had the advantage of reading the speech of my noble and learned friend, Lord Goff of Chieveley. I too agree with the reasons given for having allowed the appeal.

Lord Goff Of Chieveley

My Lords,

The Director of Public Prosecutions, acting on behalf of the Government of Sweden, appealed to this House against a decision of a Divisional Court (Stuart-Smith LJ and Popplewell J.) by which the Court granted an application by the respondent, David Thomas Alves, for habeas corpus following upon the committal of the respondent by the Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate to custody pending extradition to Sweden at the request of the Swedish Government. The appeal was brought by leave of this House.

On 20 July, this House allowed the appeal, stating that the reasons for so doing would be given later. I now set out the reasons for which I agreed that the appeal should be allowed.

The matter arose as follows. On 10 April 1985 Stephen John Price pleaded guilty in Sweden to aggravated drug offences relating to the distribution in Sweden of a substantial quantity (believed to be about 140 kilos) of cannabis imported from abroad, and was sentenced to imprisonment for seven years. On 4 September 1989, while serving that sentence, Price, who had previously made a statement to the police, appeared before Senior District Judge Barbro Sjosten sitting in the Goteborg City Court, and was examined by the District Prosecutor. Public Defending Counsel was present, as was an interpreter. The examination of Price took place in the context of proceedings for the remand in absentia of the respondent. Although Price did not give his evidence on oath (because under Swedish law an accomplice cannot be required to give evidence on oath), he was reminded of his duty to speak the truth when questioned in Court, and he declared himself to be aware of his duty of truthfulness. The evidence then given, consisting of both the questions of the Prosecutor and Price's answers to those questions, was recorded on tape. A transcript of this evidence in English was available in the present proceedings, running to 21 pages. In his evidence, Price described in detail the dealings in cannabis in which he had been involved. Throughout his evidence, Price implicated the respondent (whom he identified from a photograph) in those dealings as the man who had informed him of the consignment of cannabis in Sweden, and had asked him and a man named Ryan (who had also been sentenced to seven years imprisonment) to deliver it to customers in Sweden. Throughout his dealings with the cannabis in Sweden Price was, as he explained, answerable to the respondent; and he described in detail his conversations with the respondent during which he received instructions from him.

In 1989, the Swedish Government commenced proceedings for the extradition of the respondent from this country on charges relating to the importation of cannabis into Sweden, and the distribution of cannabis in Sweden. On 31 January 1990, the Secretary of State issued his order to proceed. In early April 1990 Price was released from prison in Sweden after serving approximately five years of his sentence. On 6 April 1990 he returned to this country, but at Dover he was found to be in possession of cannabis and was arrested. For that offence, he was sentenced to six months imprisonment. On 1 June 1990 the respondent was arrested in London and, following the first hearing of the extradition proceedings at Bow Street Magistrates' Court, he was remanded in custody. On 6 July Price was released from prison in this country.