Diplomatic Assurances as a Basis for Extradition to the People’s Republic of China

Abstract

China human rights experts have responded with scepticism to a “troubling precedent” handed down by the New Zealand Supreme Court in June. The decision, in Minister of Justice v Kim [2021] NZSC 57, opens the way for the country's Minister of Justice to approve the extradition of a man suspected of murder to the People's Republic of China (PRC). Our concern is that the Court’s underlying assumptions represent more of a politically convenient “noble lie” in terms of New Zealand-PRC bilateral relations than a reflection of current evidence. That is to say, judicial concern to leave room for a reasonable ministerial decision that the PRC can be relied on to stick to its assurances means that the Court downplays how the PRC actually has behaved in practice. Furthermore, the current structure of New Zealand’s extradition laws means the Court’s approach of maintaining final ministerial discretion allows the ultimate question of the defendant’s fate to be answered using a process that is worryingly tainted by geopolitical considerations. If nothing else, this case demonstrates why the underlying statutory framework needs amending in line with recommendations from the Law Commission.

Keywords: extradition, human rights, People's Republic of China