In what circumstances will the respondent in an extradition hearing be required to summarize the evidence before granting him an evidentiary hearing?

In my view the extradition judge may require the respondent in a hearing under Section 29 of the Act to summarize the evidence to be called and its legal significance to the application before granting him an evidentiary hearing. The nature of the evidentiary hearing, if granted, is in the discretion of the hearing judge, subject to Section 32(1)(c) of the Act as interpreted in United States of America v. Ferras, supra at para. 53. This will ensure the orderliness and fairness of the hearing, and prevent it from assuming the shape of a criminal trial. Where the proffered evidence is admissible and is relevant to an issue to be determined by the extradition judge, such as the reliability of the evidence in the record of case or its sufficiency, permission will be given to call the evidence. However, where it is either inadmissible or irrelevant such permission will not be given by the court. The respondent is not entitled to call evidence that is inadmissible. Nor is he entitled to call evidence that is irrelevant to an issue at the hearing. The essential fairness of the hearing is not diminished by such a ruling of the extradition judge. It is also compatible with the narrow jurisdiction of the court, as described in United States of America v. Ferras supra…