We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

Human rights

The extradition treaty between the UK and the US gives undue preference to the US judicial system and should be amended

Sir, The term “special relationship” (report, Mar 15), with all that David Cameron likes to think that it means, sits uncomfortably with the charges laid against Richard O’Dwyer, 23 (report, Mar 14), who is likely to be extradited to the US without a shred of evidence having being put before a UK court.

What is particularly special about the 2003 extradition treaty, the purpose of which was to apprehend terrorists, is its asymmetrical features, which favour the US judicial system over transparent due process in the UK courts. It points to a glaring disparity between the values enshrined in the Constitution of the United States — ideals of life, liberty and human happiness — and that judicial system’s denial of a person’s fundamental human rights.

The US and UK governments have now agreed to review the operation of the treaty, but there has been no mention of amending it, an undertaking made by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats when in opposition.

John Barker
Prestbury, Cheshire