Policy paper

Crime and Policing Bill: international cooperation factsheet

Updated 21 July 2025

What are we going to do?

International law enforcement data sharing agreements

New law enforcement information sharing agreements with international partners will provide law enforcement officers with access to new intelligence to fight crime. These agreements will help keep the public safe from the threat posed by international criminality and cross-border crime and help protect vulnerable people.

This legislation will provide powers to implement operational and technical aspects of new international law enforcement information-sharing agreements via regulations.  That means new crime fighting capabilities will be available to law enforcement officers as early as possible, that officers will have complete clarity of new requirements placed upon them, and that regulations can be updated as technology develops.

One example envisaged in relation to new international law enforcement agreements, is an agreement enabling a data sharing process where international partners’ relevant authorities search a UK ‘alert store’. This will be delivered through the ‘International Law Enforcement Alerts Platform (I-LEAP)’ and has potential to go beyond anything that previously existed in this space, enhancing the use of INTERPOL and introducing new alert sharing capabilities with international partners.

Extradition

Amend the provisions in the Extradition Act 2003 regarding the entitlement to retrial to ensure compatibility between UK domestic legislation and the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA).

In addition, the legislation clarifies that a right to retrial in the requesting state, subject to a court of the requesting state finding that the person was not deliberately absent in the requesting state, is sufficient for a judge to proceed to the next step of the extradition hearing.

How are we going to do it?

International law enforcement data sharing agreements

The bill creates a power to make regulations implementing international agreements relating to the sharing of information for law enforcement purposes.  This will provide powers to implement operational and technical aspects of such international agreements via secondary legislation once the agreements have been negotiated.

This measure will include a concurrent power for the devolved governments for matters within their legislative competence.

Extradition

This amendment updates section 20 of the 2003 Act to ensure compatibility with the TCA provisions on trials in absentia and UK domestic legislation. Corresponding section 85 in Part 2 (extradition to non-EU countries) is amended to the same effect, for consistency.

The bill also updates sections 20 and 85 to clarify that an entitlement to retrial which is conditional upon the requesting state court finding that the requested person was not deliberately absent is sufficient for a judge to proceed to the next step of the extradition hearing. The amendments to these sections also specify that the existence of an unexercised past right of retrial is sufficient for a judge to proceed to the next step of the extradition hearing.

Background

International law enforcement data sharing agreements

There is need for new domestic legislation to enable the UK and devolved governments to give effect, through regulations, with power to create secondary legislation with sufficient detail to enable each agreement’s technical implementation. Such legislation will provide:

• operational certainty so operational partners are explicitly aware of their obligations
• legal assurance to international partners that the risk of non-compliance will be mitigated, because international partners often require or at least prefer that agreements have a basis in UK legislation, not in common law, as the common law is not a familiar concept to some

Extradition

Under the Extradition Act 2003, the UK can accept extradition requests where the requested person is either wanted for the purposes of facing a trial (accusation warrants), or to serve their sentence after a trial has taken place (conviction warrants). When considering conviction warrants, if the requested person was convicted in their absence and a UK judge determines they were not deliberately absent from their trial, a UK judge is bound by the Extradition Act 2003 to determine whether the individual is entitled to a retrial in the requesting state.

The Extradition Act 2003 had previously been interpreted as a right to apply for a retrial subject to the domestic laws of the requesting state. This interpretation changed as a result of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of  Merticariu v Romania which required receiving states to  guarantee the right to a  retrial.  The bill restores the previous interpretation of the Extradition Act. This is required as a number of states cannot offer guaranteed retrials when individuals have been convicted in absentia which may lead to future cases being discharged on the grounds that the retrial provisions under the Act cannot be met. This would be negative for both justice outcomes and create a public safety risk should individuals be discharged for their UK proceedings.

Frequently asked questions

International law enforcement data sharing agreements

Q. What benefits will new international agreements deliver?

International agreements for the exchange of law enforcement information can vary in terms of their specific aims. This measure specifically relates to the implementation of such agreements.

New agreements will increase public protection and reduce the threat of societal harm posed by international criminality by providing law enforcement with new data, for example, in the form of international alerts to support their crime fighting activities.

One example envisaged in relation to new international law enforcement agreements is real-time alert-sharing, which will reduce decision-making time, support the accuracy of operational decisions and inform next steps taken by front-line officers to confirm a subject’s identity at the scene.

Q. What will be included in subsequent regulations?

This is dependent on the outcome of discussions with international partners.  However, we expect regulations to set out the technical requirements of new international agreements which will enable the operationalisation of the international law enforcement agreement.

For example, this could include stipulating the technology that should be used to share data, timescales within which data should be shared, and actions to taken upon receipt of data.

Q. Why do you need a delegated power?

This legislation will provide powers to implement technical aspects of new law enforcement information-sharing agreements via regulations.  That means new crime fighting capabilities will be available to law enforcement officers as early as possible, once a new international agreement has been reached.

It also means that UK law enforcement officers will have complete clarity of the new requirements placed upon them and that the regulations setting out these requirements can be updated, as technology develops. Having the relevant delegated power available will prevent any undue delay in implementing the operational benefits of a new information-sharing agreement.

This provision will use negative procedure for subsequent regulations. The international treaty preceding the use of the delegated power would be subject to Constitutional Reform and Governance Act procedures.

Extradition

Q. Does this impact safeguards governing the extradition process?

This bill does not alter the existing processes or safeguards governing extradition beyond the right to a guaranteed retrial in in absentia cases. In the UK, all human rights safeguards are enshrined in the Extradition Act 2003, which ensures that a suite of protections in this context are available to all individuals subject to an extradition request. The Extradition Act 2003 provides statutory safeguards and judicial oversight. It is for a judge to decide whether any request for extradition is made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing an individual on account of their political opinions, or whether if extradited they might be prejudiced at their trial or punished, detained or restricted in their personal liberty by reason of their political opinions.

UK courts can also bar a person’s extradition if, according to a range of factors including their health, it would be unjust or oppressive for the extradition to take place and can decide that it would be more appropriate to try the case in the UK than in the requesting state. For an offence to be considered an extraditable offence, the conduct constituting the offence request must also constitute a crime in the UK. This is a fundamental consideration for the Court, as governed by the Extradition Act 2003. This principle - known as ‘dual criminality’ - is integral to our extradition process and safeguards the rights and protections of an individual.

The bill will not change any of these protections.