US-UK political treaties: Arif Naqvi unable to defend himself at extradition trial

LONDON: Pakistani businessman Arif Naqvi was not allowed to properly defend himself at the Westminster Magistrates’ Court before Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot in an extradition hearing brought at the request of the United States government on sensational allegations of money-laundering, racketeering and fraud due to certain elements of a political treaty.

Arif Naqvi faces close to an incredible 300 years in jail on 16 counts if extradited to the US. The Abraaj Group founder’s current predicament is compounded even more by the fact that he is not allowed to contest any of the charges in the indictment against him or submit evidence on the facts of the case during the extradition hearings.

Under the current extradition treaty between the US and the UK signed in the wake of terrorism threats in 2003, extradition requests take any allegations as incapable of challenge and the extradition requesting state does not need to establish a prima facie case - as is common for other countries around the world.

In the US-UK cases, the grounds to argue extradition requests are curtailed to very few matters regarding the technicalities around extradition alone, leaving the defendants only able to argue against the extradition on the specific legal limbs of jurisdiction, forum and human rights.

Arif Naqvi - through his legal team, while not commenting on any of the merits of his case and evidence against the US - continued to deny the disturbing 291-year indictment that the US is pushing against him on count of 16 charges.

After his arrest last year, UK authorities commented that Arif Naqvi was not accused of any wrongdoing in the UK and there are no allegations against him on UK soil from where he conducted a major and substantial part of the operations of Abraaj, second only to the Dubai office.

Arif Naqvi has been accused of wrongdoing by the US government and so UK courts only examine whether he should be sent there or stay in UK. Arif Naqvi has asked the court to dismiss the American bid to take him out and instead hold the trial in Britain as the UK is the right forum for his trial, based on evidence provided in the form of witnesses and submissions.

Naqvi has argued through his lawyers that if there was a trial it should be in UK because Abraaj had more nexus and centrality to London. The US office was a small marketing and investor relations office while the London office had different functions working here full time.

The court in Central London has heard that the most amount of investors were also mostly managed from London and the senior management mostly lived in London. According to people familiar with the matter and statements made in court, it is believed that while Abraaj’s ‘forum’ may be shown to clearly be in London, the extradition hearing being heard by Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot will truly be decided on the basis of human rights as to whether Naqvi’s human rights will be violated if he goes to the US.

Naqvi’s lawyers have said that as of recent developments, there has been a significant amount of information which has come to light on the Federal US prisons in New York which have raised serious eyebrows around the world.

Expert reports have quoted freezing conditions, no light, concrete beds, rats, vermen, with one of the witnesses saying, “if you don’t have serious mental health issues before you get there, you definitely will when you do”.

This is exacerbated by the fact that Mr Naqvi’s physical and mental health conditions have significantly worsened over the course of time. It has been noted that Naqvi has stayed virtually silent with no comments but denial to the media since the outset of Abraaj’s issues. This is likely because of legal advice not to engage in a media battle with titans of the US.

But now, even in a court of law, in his place of residence, he is still unable to defend himself – meaning the only place that he can speak to the truth of his own case is in a US court, potentially after being imprisoned in a US.

The US also has a curious system of plea-bargaining, due to which pressure is exerted on prisoners to ensure that cases are resolved before they come to trial. There has been debate and discussion in the UK recently around potentially revisiting the political treaty between the two countries – especially in light of the Anne Sacoolas/Harry Dunn case which continues to be unresolved where the wife of a US intelligence official ran over a young 19-year-old British man and remains at large in the US with the US in essence refusing to send her to the UK where she faces charges and a chance in court.

Passing statements of fact provided in cross examinations of witnesses by both Mr Naqvi’s barrister Hugo Keith QC and the US government’s barrister Mark Summers QC have revealed two more very important pieces of information.

The extradition judge heard that Arif Naqvi’s Abraaj Group returned all monies to Bill Gates Foundation and other American investors with interest to the Healthcare fund were paid back to those investors in full with interest by December 31, 2017.

The court heard that Abraaj Private Equity Fund VI (APEF VI), the flagship fund, which had raised a record $3 billion before Abraaj’s collapse, was never actually drawn down and no investor monies ever invested or lost from that fund.

The court also heard separately that the US government’s entity named Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), who were also noted in the indictment, were not an investor but a debt provider, which had been repaid in full, contrary to the indictment alleging otherwise. The case continues.