{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "15",
    "document_number": "97-22",
    "date": "12/14/20",
    "document_type": "legal document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 97-22 Filed 12/14/20 Page 15 of 30\nWilliam JULIÉ\navocat à la cour - attorney at law\nand degrading treatments in custody (Article 3 ECHR)17. If the Investigating Chamber finds that the requested person would face a risk of being subject to violations of their Article 3 rights, or that there is a risk of a \"flagrant denial of justice\" in the requesting State, it must deliver a negative opinion to the extradition request.\n37. In the recent years, human rights bars to an extradition request made by the United States of America are only the subject to in-depth scrutiny by French courts when the requested person faces the imposition of the death penalty18 or the imposition of a life imprisonment sentence without the possibility of parole in the USA. We understand that this is not the case here. It can be underlined that, when needed, the USA can commit not to impose such a sentence and that such a commitment suffices to allow extradition.\n38. As long as the French government receives necessary assurances related to human rights when requested, such an argument would be very likely to be rejected in this case.\n(ii) Dual criminality\n39. A further possible bar to extradition is the dual criminality rule, which requires the conduct in respect of which extradition is sought to constitute a criminal offense in the law of both requested and requesting States.\n40. Article 2.1 of the Extradition Treaty between the USA and France expressly states that \"[a]cts shall be extraditable if they are punished under the laws in both States by deprivation of liberty for a maximum of at least one year or by a more severe penalty. If extradition is requested for purposes of enforcing a judgment, the time remaining to be served must be at least six months.\"\n41. There is no doubt that the conduct referred to in the Grand Jury charges against Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, contained in the Superseding Indictment S1 20 Cr. 330 (AJN), filed on July 8th, 2020, also constitutes criminal conduct under French law, as the crime of \"proxénétisme\".\n42. Article 225-5 of the French Criminal Code defines the crime of \"proxénétisme\" as \"the fact, by anyone, in any manner whatsoever: 1° To aid, assist or protect the prostitution\n17 Soering v United Kingdom, 07/07/1989, Application No. 14038/88; Cass. Crim., 26 March 2019, No. 19-81731.\n18 In this regard, see Article 7 of the Extradition treaty between France and the USA.\n51, rue Ampère - 75017 paris - tél. 01 88 33 51 80 - fax. 01 88 33 51 81 www.wjavocats.com - palais C1652 wj@wjavocats.com - 14 DOJ-OGR-00002139",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 97-22 Filed 12/14/20 Page 15 of 30",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "William JULIÉ\navocat à la cour - attorney at law",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "and degrading treatments in custody (Article 3 ECHR)17. If the Investigating Chamber finds that the requested person would face a risk of being subject to violations of their Article 3 rights, or that there is a risk of a \"flagrant denial of justice\" in the requesting State, it must deliver a negative opinion to the extradition request.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "37. In the recent years, human rights bars to an extradition request made by the United States of America are only the subject to in-depth scrutiny by French courts when the requested person faces the imposition of the death penalty18 or the imposition of a life imprisonment sentence without the possibility of parole in the USA. We understand that this is not the case here. It can be underlined that, when needed, the USA can commit not to impose such a sentence and that such a commitment suffices to allow extradition.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "38. As long as the French government receives necessary assurances related to human rights when requested, such an argument would be very likely to be rejected in this case.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "(ii) Dual criminality",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "39. A further possible bar to extradition is the dual criminality rule, which requires the conduct in respect of which extradition is sought to constitute a criminal offense in the law of both requested and requesting States.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "40. Article 2.1 of the Extradition Treaty between the USA and France expressly states that \"[a]cts shall be extraditable if they are punished under the laws in both States by deprivation of liberty for a maximum of at least one year or by a more severe penalty. If extradition is requested for purposes of enforcing a judgment, the time remaining to be served must be at least six months.\"",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "41. There is no doubt that the conduct referred to in the Grand Jury charges against Ms Ghislaine Maxwell, contained in the Superseding Indictment S1 20 Cr. 330 (AJN), filed on July 8th, 2020, also constitutes criminal conduct under French law, as the crime of \"proxénétisme\".",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "42. Article 225-5 of the French Criminal Code defines the crime of \"proxénétisme\" as \"the fact, by anyone, in any manner whatsoever: 1° To aid, assist or protect the prostitution",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "17 Soering v United Kingdom, 07/07/1989, Application No. 14038/88; Cass. Crim., 26 March 2019, No. 19-81731.\n18 In this regard, see Article 7 of the Extradition treaty between France and the USA.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "51, rue Ampère - 75017 paris - tél. 01 88 33 51 80 - fax. 01 88 33 51 81 www.wjavocats.com - palais C1652 wj@wjavocats.com - 14 DOJ-OGR-00002139",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "William JULIÉ",
      "Ghislaine Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "French Criminal Code",
      "USA",
      "France"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "United States of America",
      "France",
      "United Kingdom",
      "Paris"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "12/14/20",
      "07/07/1989",
      "26 March 2019",
      "July 8th, 2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "97-22",
      "S1 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "Application No. 14038/88",
      "No. 19-81731",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002139"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a legal filing related to an extradition case involving Ghislaine Maxwell. The text is mostly printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document includes references to various legal cases and treaties."
}