From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reference Re Ng Extradition
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: February 21, 1991 Judgment: September 26, 1991
Full case name: Reference Re Ng Extradition (Can.)
Court membership
Chief Justice: Antonio Lamer Puisne Justices: Bertha Wilson, Gérard La Forest, Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, John Sopinka, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, William Stevenson
Reasons given
Majority by: La Forest J. Joined by: L'Heureux-Dubé and Gonthier JJ. Concurrence by: McLachlin J. Joined by: L'Heureux-Dubé and Gonthier JJ. Dissent by: Sopinka J. Joined by: Lamer C.J. Dissent by: Cory J.

Reference Re Ng Extradition (Can.) [1991] 2 S.C.R. 858, 1991 SCC 71 is a Supreme Court of Canada reference that asked whether the extradition of a fugitive to a country that has the death penalty violates the fugitive's rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Background

Charles Chi-Tat Ng was in the custody of the State of California charged with 12 counts of murder, kidnapping, and burglary, for which he potentially faced the death penalty. Before his trial he managed to escape and flee to Canada.

On July 6, 1985 in Calgary, Alberta he was caught shoplifting, and while resisting arrest, he shot a security guard in the hand.

The United States successfully petitioned the government to have Ng extradited. Ng submitted a habeas corpus request, which was denied, followed by an application to the Alberta Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada, all of which were denied.

In response to requests to gain an assurance from the United States government not to seek the death penalty, the Minister of Justice submitted the following questions to the Supreme Court:

1. Is s. 25 of the Extradition Act, to the extent that it permits the Minister of Justice to order the surrender of a fugitive for a crime for which the fugitive may be or has been sentenced to death in the foreign state without first obtaining assurances from the foreign state that the death penalty will not be imposed, or, if imposed, will not be executed, inconsistent with ss. 7 or 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
2. If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative, is s. 25 of the Extradition Act, a reasonable limit of the rights of a fugitive within the meaning of s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and therefore not inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982?

Ruling

The Court answered both questions in the affirmative.

Majority

The Majority was written by Gérard La Forest with Claire L'Heureux-Dubé and Charles Gonthier concurring.

The Court followed its judgement as stated in Kindler v. Canada (1991) where it considered the same question and found that there was no Charter violation.

Dissent

Antonio Lamer, John Sopinka, Peter Cory on both questions.

Cory concluded that without any assurance there would be a clear violation of s.12 that could not be saved under s.1.

Aftermath

Along with Kindler, the case was essentially overruled in 2001 with United States v. Burns. In Burns, the Court found extraditing people to places where they might face the death penalty breached fundamental justice under the Charter.

In 1998, Ng was convicted in California of 11 counts of murder and sentenced to death. As of 2008 he remains on death row awaiting execution.

See also

• List of Supreme Court of Canada cases

External links

• Full text of Supreme Court of Canada decision at LexUMand CanLII