2.
3.
4.
(b)
CLIFFORD CHANCE
高偉紳津師行
You will note that most of the discussions were on a confidential "lawyer to lawyer' basis which I understand to be the usual procedure adopted by French Avocat's in discussions with Government departments when formal decisions have yet to be made. The penultimate paragraph of the report summarises the differing positions as to the characterisation of the offences arising from the facts in respect of which Dr Saniman's extradition is sought. Briefly, the offences were characterised as "escroquerie" which I understand to be similar to conspiracy to defraud; they could also be characterised as "abus de confiance" which equates with breach of trust; however, the offence which best fits the bill is that of "abus de biens sociaux" (misuse of corporate assets) which is not one of the offences covered by the Extradition Treaty of 1876.
Following the meetings referred to in the report of 16 September 1992, our avocat of the Conseil d'Etat, Madam Masse-Dessen, submitted to the Ministry of Justice, an additional letter dated 17 September 1992 giving further information. Copies of that letter together and a free translation are attached for your information.
On whom was the Gracious Request served?
I have yet to receive final confirmation from Paris but my file indicates that the Gracious Request was served on the office of the President, the Ministry of Justice, the office of the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The likely reaction of the French Government to French proceedings
I believe that Mr McGregor, the Political Adviser to the British Ambassador in Paris, is best placed to advise you on this. I understand from my Paris office that he has received an indication from the office of the Deputy Foreign Minister that it would be understood“ if contentious proceedings were initiated
The procedure In the Consell d'Elat
Proceedings were initiated on 12 November 1992 when the "Summary Application was filed with the Clerk's Office at the Conseil d'Etat under No 142.578. I do not yet have a signed copy of the document but I am told that it was in the form of the translated draft which I handed to you at our meeting. Having filed that document, we now have four months within which to prepare and file full submissions. I understand that, thereafter, the court sets the time for the service of further submissions by both parties but that, in practice, the French Government are not bound by the time limits imposed by the court and that they often take longer to file their submissions. It is for this reason that our team of lawyers in Paris advised that the proceedings in the Conseil d'Etat may take as long as three to four years to reach conclusion.
I believe that the above information deals with all your queries save for the question of whether the Ministry of Justice received written representations from Dr Saniman prior to making the decision
HANCE
30:91