Conseil d'Etat
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1994-11-24 | N/A | Avis Consultatif (Advisory Opinion) No. 356-641 issued | France | View |
EFTA00016784.pdf
This document is a legal opinion by French attorney William Julié, dated December 18, 2020, submitted in support of Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for release. Julié argues against the US government's position that France would not extradite Maxwell because of her French citizenship. He contends that under the US-France Extradition Treaty and the EU-US Agreement, France retains the discretion to extradite nationals and, unlike the 2007 Hans Peterson case, would likely do so in Maxwell's case.
DOJ-OGR-00002146.jpg
This document is a page from a legal opinion filed on December 14, 2020, by French attorney William Julié in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text argues that French Constitutional law and the 1996 Extradition Treaty with the US do not strictly prohibit the extradition of French nationals, asserting that it is ultimately an executive decision. The author concludes that if Maxwell were to flee to France, the French Investigating Chamber would not be legally bound to block her extradition to the United States.
DOJ-OGR-00020121.jpg
This document is a page from a legal opinion by French lawyer William Julié, filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. It analyzes the extradition treaty between France and the USA, arguing that France has the discretion to extradite its own citizens. The text specifically rebuts a DOJ argument based on the 2007 'Hans Peterson' case (involving Senators Obama and Durbin), stating that the Peterson outcome was a discretionary ministerial decision rather than a binding judicial precedent.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity