Fundamental human rights must be considered by the courts in extradition proceedings, a young man fighting extradition to the United States has insisted.
Daniel Joe Meli, 27, is legally contesting an extradition request by US authorities after FBI investigations linked him to alleged sales of malware on the dark web between December 2012 and June 2022.
A Grand Jury at the District Court in Georgia issued a bill of indictment in respect of Meli in December 2023.
Following the extradition request, arrest warrants were issued by the Maltese courts for the police to investigate Meli for alleged computer misuse and for his arrest.
Meli was arraigned in February and initially consented to the extradition, invoking the rule of speciality which meant that he could only face prosecution for the offences mentioned in the extradition request.
However, after engaging new lawyers, Meli set up a legal challenge to his surrender to the United States, arguing that the Magistrates’ Court had not verified whether he was medically fit and capable of understanding what he was consenting to.
He first filed an appeal before the Court of Criminal Appeal, asking that court to allow him to produce evidence to prove that he was not in the right state of mind when consenting to extradition. When that was turned down, he filed constitutional proceedings wherein he summoned a long line of medical professionals who testified about his psychological problems, his long-term substance abuse and social anxiety.
The First Hall, Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction was to assess whether Meli had validly consented to the extradition. Yet when delivering judgment, that court concluded that fundamental rights considerations, particularly the right to a fair hearing, did not apply in extradition proceedings.
The court also ruled that Meli lacked victim status.
Meli has now appealed that decision before the Constitutional Court.
His lawyers pleaded that extradition laws were meant to ensure that all guarantees were judicially verified so that the surrender of a wanted person was not reduced to a merely ‘political’ process, argued Meli’s lawyers.
"It is inconceivable to argue that the right to a fair hearing is not to be taken into consideration in extradition cases which are equivalent to other criminal proceedings," lawyer Franco Debono said.
There was a whole line of judgments which upheld this argument, the latest being that delivered on Monday in the case of the Romanian prince, he observed.
Citing that decision by Madam Justice Edwina Grima, Meli’s lawyers said that extradition laws must always be interpreted in line with fundamental human rights.
And since the alleged breach of that right affected Meli personally, then the appellant had victim status, argued his lawyers requesting the court to uphold the appeal.
Lawyers Franco Debono, Arthur Azzopardi and David Chetcuti Dimech are assisting Meli.