PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad (CMC) — The Court of Appeal has reserved its ruling in a matter in which the United States government is appealing against a High Court ruling that Washington be excluded from being part of the judicial review claim brought by former FIFA vice president Jack Warner challenging his extradition to the United States on fraud related charges.

Warner’s attorney, British Queen’s Counsel James Lewis told a three-judge panel at the Court of Appeal in Port of Spain Tuesday that his client does not know if the Office of the Attorney General will properly present the United States’ argument before Justice James Aboud in the High Court.

The attorney made the submission as he addressed the court in an appeal filed by the US government after Aboud dismissed an application earlier this year, in which the United States was seeking to become a party to the judicial review proceedings. 

In his judgment delivered in June, Aboud had stated even though the proceedings were relative to Warner’s extradition, the issue up for determination was strictly domestic and, as such, did not warrant the participation of the United States.

The judge had said it was his opinion the US could not make any useful input in the proceedings that could assist the court in arriving at the proper and correct decision.

Warner, 72, was released on TT$2.5 million (One TT dollar =US$0.16) bail when he made his first court appearance on May 27 last year.

He is charged with 12 offences related to racketeering, corruption and money laundering allegedly committed in the jurisdiction of the United States and Trinidad and Tobago, dating as far back as 1990.

Warner, in his claim, is questioning the procedure adopted by the Office of the Attorney General in signing off on the US’s request for his extradition made in May, last year, at the end of the US Department of Justice’s investigation into the world governing football body.

Washington had sought to be an interest party in the hearing of the judicial review, claiming that it should be granted permission to be heard as it had sufficient interest in the proceedings to be heard.

But Justice Aboud in his oral ruling asked: “What can it say differently from the AG? It cannot be to say the same thing differently.

“Is the AG’s position different from the US? Does the AG want the US to say something he won’t say? It must be able to offer something more than repetition,” Justice Aboud added.

During the three hour submission on Tuesday, Chief Justice Archie asked the attorney representing the whether he trusted the Attorney General.

“Well that’s one way of putting it,” he said, insisting that Washington could not abrogate its own position on the extradition challenge onto another party.

“That’s why we’re here. It may be that his interests are informed by different factors, such as politics, we are entitled to make sure our interests are put forth,” Lewis said.

“We have different interests than that of the Attorney General,” Lewis said.

Warner claims the case against him is politically motivated and accuses the United States of seeking revenge because it lost to Qatar in its bid to host the 2022 World Cup.