Update 5 / Zurich, Switzerland (GenevaLunch) – Film director Roman Polanski‘s French lawyer Hervé Temime says in a press release that his client is refusing to accept extradition to the US, Swiss news agency AFP reports Monday afternoon. Polanski, in town to receive a lifetime achievement award, was arrested Saturday at Zurich Airport. The news was announced by the organizers of the Zurich Film Festival, who describe the news as a “shock.” The Swiss Justice and Police department spokesperson, Guido Balmer, has since said that “There is no reason not to carry out a valid international arrest warrant.”
The department issued a statement late Sunday afternoon:
“The US authorities are accusing Roman Polanski of sexual acts with minors, specifically in a case of 1977 with a 13-year-old girl in Los Angeles. Since the end of 2005 the US authorities are searching worldwide for Roman Polanski. A US arrest warrant against Roman Polanski exists since 1978.” The government will not issue further details, given the pending status of the extradition request, except to explain the process: “Whether Roman Polanski will be effectively extradited to the USA or not, can be established only, after the extradition process judicially has been finalised. It is possible to appeal at the federal penal court of justice against an arrest warrant in view to extradition as well as against an extradition decision. Their decisions can be taken further to the federal court of justice.”
Polanski pleaded guilty in 1977 and served 42 days in prison, but when his sentence was lengthened he left the country.
The French and Polish governments have told Switzerland they would like to intervene, according to Swiss radio RSR, since a judge in the US refused to allow the case to be abandoned in 2008, despite the agreement of the woman who originally brought charges. Polanski has been appealing the decision in the past year, asking for the case to be dismissed.
Extradition for a penal process can take several months if Polanski does not agree to it and files an appeal. First signs are that the actor, who lives in Paris but reportedly has a home in Gstaad, will appeal, possibly with help from France, which does not have an extradition treaty with the US. His French lawyer is quoted by ABC News Monday as saying he is likely to fight extradition.
Switzerland has such a treaty and has extradited several people at the request of the US, over the years. Among recent notable cases, Russian Yevgeny Adamov was arrested in May 2005 in Bern, at the request of the US government, on charges of fraud. He had been head of the Russian Atomic Energy Commission and was accused of embezzling $9 million. The Swiss government approved his extradition in October 2005 – but both the US and Russia wanted to extradite him, and in the end Russia won. He was tried in February 2008, sentenced to five years in prison, then released by a higher court.
Adnan Khashoggi, multi-billionaire, is another of Switzerland’s famous arrests for extradition: in 1989, not long after making the cover of Time magazine, the arms deals middleman was arrestd and held for three months on US charges of concealing funds before being sent to the US, where he was tried and acquited in 1990, along with Isabel Marcos, of fraud and racketeering.
Polanski shot to fame as a director with Rosemary’s Baby in 1969 and scored big again in 1979 with Tess. In 2002 he won an Oscar for directing The Pianist.
Links to other sites: ABC News, USA, Los Angeles Times, Swiss government explanation of the extradition process (English)
This work by genevalunch.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported.
News story, GenevaLunch, 27 September 2009.
Filed under: Society
Tags: arrested, France, law, legal, Poland, Roman Polanski, Switzerland, US warrant, Zurich, Zurich Film Festival



























September 27th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
Whether Roman Polanski will be effectively extradited to the USA or not, can be established only, after the extradition process judicially has been finalised.
Problem with commas in this sentence, no? or structure?
September 28th, 2009 at 5:18 am
You’re quite right and normally, even for a direct quote from a printed source (which this is), we’d tidy it a bit and use our house spelling style. But this is a comment on a legal situation, from the justice ministry, so I decided to leave it in its original form. In fairness to them, this is not an official government language and they were quick to get out a statement on a Sunday afternoon.