Jg. 1 (2014): Thomas Kruessmann: Consequences of Dzhaksybergenov v Ukraine on the extradition decision regarding Rakhat ALIYEV (SHORAZ) and associates in Austria

Following up on the Dzhaksybergenov v Ukraine decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) of 10 February 2011 which registered substantial improvements in the human rights situation in Kazakhstan and removed the de facto ban on extradition to this country, REEES was tasked with conducting an opinion poll among decision makers in Kazakhstan, but also among the major economic players in Austria with interests in Central Asia. Dzaksyber-genov fundamentally altered the legal framework for the extradition decision relating to Rakhat ALIYEV (SHORAZ) and his associates by Austrian authorities.

While previous decisions such as Kaboulov v Ukraine and Baysakov et al v Ukraine created strong reasons to assume that a favourable extradition decision would run counter to the principle of non-refoulement, the ECHR now opened the door to extradition.

In this new legal environment Austrian authorities face the choice of either engaging their Kazakh counterparts in establishing a constructive framework to enable extradition or to refuse co-operation and disregard the efforts made by Kazakh authorities to improve the human rights situation in the country.

This policy paper was designed to reflect the positions held in the legal, political and econom-ic decision-making communities both in Austria and in Kazakhstan at around March 2011 following Dzaksybergenov. It contains the background information as it was presented to interview partners and records their statements in anonymised form. The analysis draws on a total of 20 interviews held in Kazakhstan as well as 10 interviews held in Austria. Interview partners received a questionnaire on their perception of the impending ALIYEV (SHORAZ) extradition decision. Based on these answers a number of additional questions were posed. In order to distinguish the position of the legal / political decision makers on the one hand and of economic decision-makers of the others, both groups were faced with a different set of questions.

This paper is not meant to endorse one or the other political response to the upcoming ALIYEV (SHORAZ) extradition decision. On the contrary, by describing and analyzing the answers received, it purports to support the political process in Austria and provide it with additional information on which to base the upcoming decision.

About the Author:

Thomas Krüßmann leitet das REEES seit seiner Gründung im September 2010. Daneben ist er als europäischer niedergelassener Rechtsanwalt im Rahmen des CIS & Russian Desk bei LANSKY, GANZGER + partner in Wien tätig. Thomas Krüßmann studierte Rechtswissenschaften an der Universität Passau, Politikwissenschaften, Slawistik und Amerikanistik an der Freien Universität Berlin sowie an der Indiana University (Bloomington). Seine Promotion an der Universität Hamburg zum Thema "Privatisierung und Restrukturierung in Russland" (summa cum laude) gründet auf Forschungsarbeiten am Europa Institut Budapest, an der Rochester University (USA) sowie einem LL.M. in Corporate and Commercial Law, den er am King's College London abgelegt hat. Das Zweite Juristische Staatsexamen folgte in Berlin. Nach Jahren der Projektarbeit und des Consulting (TACIS Ukraine) kehrte Herr Krüßmann an die Universität Passau zurück, wo er sich 2006 zum Thema "Der nationale Strafprozess vor der Herausforderung durch transnationale organisierte Kriminalität. Grundlagen eines transnationalen Strafprozessrechts" habilitierte. Von 2006 bis 2009 war Herr Krüßmann stv. Leiter des Universitätslehrganges "Master in South European Law and European Integration" an der Universität Graz.

Zur Seitenansicht
Gesamten Jahrgang herunterladen
Download 1 2014 Thomas Kruessmann Consequences of Dzhaksybergenov v Ukraine on the extrad [0,71 mb]