Since the European Court of Human Rights\u2019 ruling prohibiting Poland from extraditing a Taiwanese man to China became final in January 2023, Spain is the only major European country that has continued to hand over \u2014 albeit in spurts \u2014 citizens wanted by Beijing. <\/p>\n
In 2023 and 2024, the Spanish government authorized nine extraditions to continue through judicial channels, and at least one person has already been handed over to Chinese authorities. On October 29, 2024, after almost two years in prison, this 41-year-old man, wanted for fraud, was released from Madrid\u2019s Soto del Real prison to be extradited to the People\u2019s Republic of China<\/a>. \u201cI have no information about his situation or treatment in China, except that he is awaiting trial,\u201d confirms the lawyer who defended him during the process, Carlos Aguirre de C\u00e1rcer.<\/p>\n The lack of guarantees that extradited individuals would receive humane and fair treatment in China was the reason why the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) prohibited Poland from extraditing Taiwanese Hung Tao Liu in a landmark judgment, Liu v. Poland<\/a>. Reports by the United Nations and non-governmental organizations such as Amnesty International<\/a> found, in the eyes of the seven judges, \u201cthe use of torture and ill-treatment\u201d in Chinese prisons and detention centers \u201cto such an extent that it may amount to a situation of generalized violence.\u201d <\/p>\n Consequently, the ECHR exempted Liu from having to prove a specific personal risk, given that the extradition request indicated that, once in China, he would be placed in a detention center, which was \u201csufficient\u201d to deny the extradition. \u201cAn individual requesting protection must be guaranteed the benefit of the doubt,\u201d reads the judgment of October 6, 2022.<\/p>\n Since the ruling became final in January 2023, Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands and Norway have not handed over any person wanted by the Chinese authorities, as confirmed to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) by various authorities in these countries within the framework of China Targets, an investigation coordinated by the ICIJ, in which EL PA\u00cdS participate.<\/p>\n However, both the Spanish High Court, the judicial body with authority over extraditions, and the Spanish government, which has the final say in this area, maintain that the decision to extradite someone or not must be made based on the specific circumstances of each case, as this newspaper has confirmed through government sources and a dozen court rulings. \u201cSpain has had an extradition treaty with China since 2005 that contains guarantees such as the non-application of the death penalty<\/a>,\u201d argues a spokesperson for the Ministry of the Presidency, Justice and Parliamentary Relations. \u201cWe are one of the few EU countries that has an extradition treaty with China, which means there is a legal basis and guarantees,\u201d the same sources state.<\/p>\n Laura Harth, China director of Safeguard Defenders, a human rights group whose reports some judges at the High Court have cited in their rulings, finds it \u201castonishing\u201d that a court under the jurisdiction of the Council of Europe \u2014 \u201cwhich includes Spanish courts\u201d \u2014 should, in her interpretation, \u201cso easily ignore the conclusions of the ECHR and approve extraditions to China.\u201d At the time of speaking to EL PA\u00cdS, Safeguard Defenders, which monitors and opposes extraditions, had not recorded any extraditions from Europe to China in the past two years.<\/p>\n A \u201cverbal\u201d guarantee<\/p>\n Liu had arrived in Poland fleeing Spain, where he lived. In December 2016, the Chinese government issued a warrant through Interpol for him and more than 200 other Taiwanese citizens, accusing them of a massive telephone scam. After the Constitutional Court denied them protection, 220 Taiwanese detained in Spain were handed over to China, according to ministry data. Having fled Spain, Liu was arrested in August 2017 and lost every court case in Poland. But he ended up protected by Strasbourg, the city where the European Court is based.<\/p>\n Following the current doctrine of the Spanish Constitutional Court, the High Court\u2019s interpretation softens the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights: it does not interpret Strasbourg as having prohibited extraditions to China while the \u201csituation of generalized violence\u201d against its detainees persists, but rather that the Beijing regime must be required in each case to guarantee that the fundamental rights of those surrendered will be respected. And the surrender must be made conditional on such a guarantee.<\/p>\n And what does this guarantee consist of? In a statement that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs requests in a \u201cverbal note\u201d to the Chinese embassy in Madrid, according to a document to which this newspaper has had access. The ministry requests that \u201cthe Chinese authorities provide this guarantee\u201d: that is, in the event the person is handed over, the document states, \u201cthe fundamental human rights of the person sought will not be violated, nor will they be subjected to ill-treatment, in the sense established in the judgment of October 6, 2022, of the European Court of Human Rights.\u201d In this case, the person sought was an English teacher; China did not submit the guarantee on time, and the court rejected the extradition.<\/p>\n At least four other extraditions have been rejected by the court because they violated the treaty requirements in one way or another. Luis Chabaneix, founder and director of a Madrid-based firm specializing in extraditions that has managed to stop two extraditions to China in extremis in recent months, believes that, despite the extradition treaty and the alignment of interests that may exist between governments \u2014 Spanish Prime Minister Pedro S\u00e1nchez<\/a> has traveled to China three times on official visits \u2014 \u201cdeep down, judges are almost ashamed to send someone there\u201d and agree to suspend them for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n