The extradition of the applicant to a country where he risks a life sentence without the possibility of release is contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention

In its Babar Ahmad and others v. United Kingdom judgment of 10 April 2012, the applicants, suspected of terrorism, argued before the European Court of Human Rights that their extradition to the United States was contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. According to them, the particularly strict conditions of detention in the penitentiary center “  ADX Florence  in Colorado where they will be held and the fact that they could face a life sentence was contrary to article 3 of the convention.

The European Court then observed that the applicants did not denounce the conditions of detention in the penitentiary center “  ADX Florence  but the absence of procedural guarantees to obtain the adjustment of their sentence. The European Court then considered that once extradited to the United States, there was no evidence that the applicants would be placed in this prison center even if they were considered terrorists. It also considered that, given the seriousness of the charges against them, if they were found guilty of these criminal acts, the possible sentencing of the applicants to a life sentence without the possibility of release would not be incompatible with Article 3. To consolidate its position, the European Court ruled that the United States has a long tradition of respect for human rights and democracy and this country is considered a safe country.

However, in a judgment in Trabelsi against Belgium, delivered on September 4, 2014, the European Court reviewed its position by considering that an incompressible life sentence of the applicant in the event of his extradition to the United States was contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.