Getting an appeal extradition case in front of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) is no small feat. The lawyer in this case is pushing for leave to appeal, which is a formal request asking the SCC to review the decision. Without this leave, the case won’t even be considered—making this step critical for anyone trying to challenge an extradition order at the highest level.
But why does this matter? Extradition cases in Canada are notoriously hard to fight. The legal bar for stopping extradition is high, and once lower courts have ruled, only cases with serious legal questions make it to the SCC. If the court grants leave, the justices see a potential issue worth clarifying for future cases. If they refuse, the decision stands, and the person facing extradition is out of legal options in Canada.
How the Extradition Appeal Process Works in Canada
Extradition cases follow a strict process in Canada, which is governed by the Extradition Act. If a foreign country requests someone’s extradition, the case first goes through a committal hearing in a provincial court. If the judge believes there’s enough evidence to justify extradition, they order the person to be surrendered. But that’s not the final step—the case then moves to the Minister of Justice, who decides whether or not to send the person abroad.
At this point, the person facing extradition can challenge the minister’s decision in a judicial review at the Court of Appeal. If that appeal fails, the last option is the SCC—but since the SCC doesn’t hear every case, the lawyer must first seek leave to appeal.
Most requests for leave are rejected. The SCC only takes cases that raise new, unsettled legal questions or have a broad impact beyond the individual case. In extradition cases, this usually means arguments around constitutional rights, due process, or Canada’s legal obligations under international treaties.
Why Appeal Extradition Cases Are So Hard to Fight
Extradition cases favor the requesting country. Unlike a full criminal trial, an extradition hearing isn’t about proving guilt or innocence—it’s about whether there’s enough legal ground to justify sending someone to another country for prosecution. Canadian courts assume the foreign justice system is fair unless there’s clear evidence to suggest otherwise.
Take the case of Hassan Diab, a Lebanese-Canadian professor who was extradited to France in 2014 based on flimsy evidence linking him to a 1980 bombing. After spending years in a French prison, he was released without trial due to lack of evidence. Diab’s case is often cited as an example of how Canada’s extradition laws can fail to protect individuals from wrongful extradition.
Another major case was that of Michaela Ghirghi, an Ontario woman whose extradition to the U.S. was approved despite concerns about whether her rights would be fully protected under American law. Her legal team argued that Canada’s extradition system makes it too easy for the government to approve foreign requests without enough scrutiny.
What This Appeal Could Mean
If the SCC agrees to hear this case, it could set a precedent for future extradition challenges. Lawyers and human rights advocates have pushed for reforms to Canada’s Extradition Act. They argue that the system is too deferential to foreign governments. A ruling from the SCC could clarify how much evidence should be required in extradition cases. Or even place stricter limits on when Canada should approve these requests.
For the person facing extradition, this appeal is their last shot. If leave is denied, it will likely be handed over to the requesting country within weeks. If leave is granted, their legal team can argue why the extradition should be stopped. That potentially influences how similar cases are handled in the future.
Final Thoughts: Appeal Extradition
Extradition cases rarely make it to the SCC, but when they do, they can have major consequences. Canada’s system has been criticized for making it too easy to extradite individuals, sometimes with devastating results. This lawyer’s push for an appeal isn’t just a legal maneuver. This move becomes a battle over fundamental justice, fairness, and due process questions.
If the SCC takes the case, it could spark broader discussions about whether Canada needs to overhaul its extradition laws. If they don’t, another person will be forced out of the country, with no more legal avenues left to fight.
Author: Emily Sloane
Bio: Emily Sloane is a legal journalist with a background in international law. She specializes in extradition cases and human rights in cross-border legal disputes.
