1. Sections 3(3) and 15(3) of the Extradition Act 1989, 9 & 10 Eliz. 2, c. 33. See G. Ossman, ?The Doctrine of Abuse of Process of the Court: Its Impact on the Principles of extradition without Conventional Obligation and of Speciality?, 16(1)Liverpool Law Review (1994), 67?84.
2. David Thomas Alves v.Director of Public Prosecutions and Another, [1992] 4 All E.R. 787.
3. As regards the definition of the term ?corroboration?, see P. Murphy,A Practical Approach to Evidence, Blackstone Press Ltd., 4th ed., 1992, 504: ?The word ?corroboration? connotes support of confirmation, and indicates, in relation to the law of evidence, that certain evidence (the evidence to be corroborated) is confirmed in its tenor and effect by other admissible and independent evidence (the corroborating evidence). See also J.D. Heydon & M. Ockelton,Evidence and Cases and Materials, Butterworths & Co Publishers Ltd., 3rd ed., 1991, 69, ?Corroboration is evidence tending to confirm some fact of which other evidence is given.?
4. Alves, supra n.2 at 788, paras. (c) and (d).
5. Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between the United States of America and the United Kingdom, 19 November 1794, B.F.S.P., Vol. 1, p. 784; M.R.P.T., Vol. 5, p. 640.