Is defence evidence that strikes directly at the reliability of the requesting state’s materials admissible at the extradition hearing?

While the extradition judge must consider the threshold reliability of the evidence put forward by the requesting state, the judge is not entitled to engage in a broader weighing of evidence or consider the general strength of the case. Evidence that strikes directly at the reliability of the requesting state’s materials, therefore, is relevant at the committal hearing and is admissible. On the other hand, defence evidence that simply puts forward a different account of events, or attempts to show that the requesting state’s evidence is ultimately not credible will not be relevant to the s. 29 inquiry: see United States v. Wilson, 2011 BCCA 514.