US: Fighting extradition
01 July 1991
Joseph Doherty is the longest-held prisoner in the history of the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York. He has now spent eight years in confinement. He was arrested and imprisoned in New York City on 18 June 1983, on an immigration warrant. Request for his extradition was lodged by the British government in August 1983.
The Extradition request was denied by US District Court Judge John E Sprizzo in December 1984 on the ground that the acts for which extradition sought not common crimes but rather offences of a political character; extradition was therefore barred by the political offence exception provision of controlling treaty. He said "the facts of this case present the assertion of the political offence exception in its most classic form." [Matter of Doherty 599 F.Supp. 270 276 (S.D.N.Y. 1984)].
In February 1985, the executive branch filed an unprecedented lawsuit against Mr Doherty, asserting that Judge Sprizzo decided the extradition case wrongly. In June 1985, US District Court Judge Charles S Haight Jr, dismissed the government's lawsuit, ruling that Judge Sprizzo's order denying extradition was not subject to review. [United States v. Doherty 615 F.Supp. 755 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)]
In March 1986, the US Court of Appeals termed the executive branch position "startling" and affirmed Judge Haight's decision in favour of Mr Doherty in all respects. [United States v Doherty 786 F.2d 491 (2d Cir. 1986)]
On 19 September 1986, Immigration Judge Howard I Cohen entered an order rejecting the claim of the executive branch that Mr. Doherty should be deported to the United Kingdom. Judge Cohen ordered Mr Doherty returned to Ireland, the country of which he is a citizen.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) appealed on the ground that Mr Doherty's deportation to Ireland would be prejudicial to the interests of the United States. On 11 March 1987, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), in a unanimous decision, ruled in favour of Mr Doherty and against the INS. It observed that no such claim of prejudice has ever before been raised and that the INS presented no evidence to support it
The INS moved to reopen the BIA decision on the ground that it wished to submit evidence in support of its claim of prejudice. On 22 May 1987, the BIA, in a 3-2 decision, reaffirmed the correctness of the order rejecting the executive branch's assertion that Mr Doherty should be returned to the United Kingdom.
Unable to prevail in any forum, the Reagan administration referred the case to Attorney General Edwin Meese for his personal "review." By so doing, the Attorney General, the losing party throughout, was empowered to have the final say on whether he should have lost.
On 9 June 1988, Edwin Meese reversed his own immigration officials decision and ordered Joseph Doherty deported to the United Kingdom. The controversial ruling effectively vitiated six separate decisions in Mr. Doherty's favour.
Prior to the Attorney General's controversial decision, the Justice Department's handling of the case necessitated Mr Doherty's filing, on 3 December 1987, a motion to reopen the deportation proceeding to permit him to reassert his claims for political asylum and withholding of deportation as well as to enable him to redesignate his country of deportation.
The motion was necessitated by the 1 December 1987, implementation, in Ireland, of the Extradition (European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism) Act, 1987. Subsequent to its implementation, Mr Doherty's deportation to Ireland would be the functional equivalent of extradition to the United Kingdom.
On 14 November 1988, the BIA, in a 3-2 decision, granted Mr Doherty's motion to reopen the deportation proceedings. This decision, the seventh in his favour, entitled Mr Doherty to a hearing on his claims for political asylum and/or withholding of deportation. The granting of either would bar his return to the United Kingdom.
The Department of Justic