Boris urged to back Lynch in fight with US
Why we MUST block the extradition of British tech tycoon Mike Lynch
BORIS Johnson must block American attempts to extradite the technology tycoon once dubbed ‘Britain’s Bill Gates’ on fraud charges, former cabinet ministers and business leaders have said.
Mike Lynch, the founder of Cambridge software giant Autonomy, has been accused of cooking its books before it was sold to Hewlett Packard (HP) for £7bn.
He denies the allegations – and the case was dropped after a UK probe – but could face a decade in jail if extradited under a 2003 Anglo-American treaty, and found guilty in the US. The case has prompted calls for the Government to intervene, backed yesterday by former cabinet ministers, including Tories David Davis, Andrew Mitchell, Lord Maude of Horsham, and Liberal Democrat Sir Vince Cable.
Former Rolls-Royce boss Sir John Rose, tech entrepreneur Brent Hoberman and former Barclays chairman Marcus Agius also joined them.
In a letter to the Times newspaper criticising the extradition law, they said: ‘This is not justice. Politicians on all sides want it changed. We’ve surrendered sovereignty over our own justice system for too long.
The Government cannot stand by as another Briton risks being delivered like this to the US system.’
Dr Lynch is due to appear before magistrates next month to contest his extradition. His lawyers say the US is trying to exert extra-territorial jurisdiction over a British company governed by English law.
The US has jailed former Autonomy finance chief Sushovan Hussain and claims Dr Lynch was involved in a massive fraud. Dr Lynch made hundreds of millions of pounds from the sale of Autonomy.
Dr Mike Lynch is that rarest of rare birds: a super-successful British tech entrepreneur. Hailing from a modest background – he is the son of a fireman and a nurse from essex – he became one of the most extraordinary scientists and businessmen this country has ever produced.
Yet instead of being feted, he is facing an extradition hearing that could see him flown off to the US to be put on trial for fraud.
The accusation is that he cooked the books at Autonomy, the software company he founded, which was sold to American giant Hewlett Packard in 2011. if he is extradited, and if he is denied bail as most foreigners are, he is likely to be flung in a high- security prison cell with murderers, drug dealers and other serious criminals, thousands of miles from family and friends.
At this point, many readers will no doubt wonder why they should trouble themselves about the plight of a very wealthy man, whose former finance director at Autonomy is already in a US jail for fraud.
But far more is at stake here than the guilt or innocence of one individual. indeed, whether or not Dr Lynch has committed the crimes alleged is beside the point. For he is the victim of a dangerously one-sided extradition treaty with the US and his predicament goes to the heart of the sovereignty we supposedly recovered through Brexit.
in this country, we have a perfectly good legal system of our own to deal with the likes of Dr Lynch.
Similarly, our courts are also perfectly capable of dealing with US di pl omat’s wife Anne Sacoolas. She allegedly killed 19-year-old Harry Dunn in a car accident, but the Americans show no inclination to let her face British justice.
So why on earth would we take back control from the european courts, only to hand it over meekly to the Department of Justice in the US?
Dr Lynch is, after all, a British subject. He ran a London-listed company and hi s al l eged offences took place in the Uk.
if he has a case to answer, he should do so in Britain, not on the other side of the Atlantic.
What makes this even more galling is that allegations against him have already been considered by the Serious Fraud Office, a full five years ago.
investigators concluded there was insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. Hewlett-Packard also mounted a £4bn civil fraud case that has been heard in the High Court in London. it finished a year ago, though there is as yet no ruling.
These alleged offences, then, have already undergone exhaustive probing here over many years, or so you would think.
This is not an isolated episode. One of several similar cases is that of the ‘Natwest Three’.
This trio of British bankers was investigated by the Uk authorities two decades ago, over financial crimes alleged to have taken place in the Uk. The British regulators decided there were no grounds for prosecution.
THethree men were carted off to the US nevertheless, because the Department of Justice believed their actions had played a part in the downfall of energy giant enron.
Threatened with 35 years in a high security prison, they chose to plead guilty in return for shorter sentences and received 37 months in a Texan jail.
As highly-paid bankers, they struggled for public sympathy. Again, though, the point is not their guilt or innocence, but one of principle.
The US is choosing to treat our legal system with crushing disrespect, as if we were a banana republic and not a valued ally.
Using the treaty against the likes of Dr Lynch is a grotesque perversion of its original intent.
it was signed in 2003, when memories of the 9/11 atrocities were still vivid, ostensibly to help the US to extradite terror suspects and other serious criminals. in reality, though, it has been deployed mainly against white-collar suspects and weaponised against f oreigners involved in commercial disputes with US companies.
it is inherently unfair because the burden of proof for the Americans to extradite a British subject is far lower than the other way around.
As a consequence, according to Tory grandee David Davis, one of the most scathing critics, the US has since 2007 extradited 135 Britons, of whom 99 were accused of non-violent crimes. The Americans have handed over 11 citizens to the Uk.
Certainly, the demands for the extradition of Dr Lynch look like a vindictive attack on a gifted businessman rather than a reasonable request.
And unfortunately, what has happened to him could happen to almost any Uk businessman or woman.
They could find themselves flung into an American prison for so- called ‘crimes’ that did not even take place under US jurisdiction.
it is time for this treaty to be ripped up and replaced with one that is fair and fit for purpose.