The Supreme Court upheld the extradition of Israeli citizen Yevgeny Berezovsky to Russia

The Supreme Court rejected yet another attempt by Yevgeny Berezovsky to block his extradition to Russia, thereby paving the way for his transfer to stand trial on piracy charges—17 years after the alleged crimes were committed.

Yevgeny Berezovsky, an Israeli citizen currently being held at the Central Prison, filed a motion for a writ of habeas corpus and for his release from custody. The court ruled that Yevgen Berezovsky had not proven the illegality of his detention, nor had he demonstrated that extradition to the Russian Federation would be unjust or an unreasonably harsh measure.

He has been in custody since February 25, 2026, when the Larnaca District Court ruled that the conditions for his extradition had been met and ordered that he be held in custody until the extradition took place.

Russian authorities intend to try Yevgeny Berezovsky for piracy committed by an organized group using violence and weapons (or objects used as weapons). According to the request, the crimes were allegedly committed between July 24 and August 17, 2009.

The Supreme Court noted that the habeas corpus procedure is intended to review the legality of detention and to protect personal liberty. However, in cases where a person is held in custody after an extradition request has been approved, the court does not act as an appellate court. It cannot review the facts established by the court that authorized the extradition, nor can it substitute its own judgment for that court’s decision if it was rendered in accordance with the law.

 Berezovsky argued that insufficient evidence had been provided to prove that he was, in fact, the person sought by the Russian authorities. The judge held that this was essentially an attempt to challenge the findings of the District Court, which had at its disposal evidence such as passports and relevant testimony. In the Supreme Court’s view, this evidence supported the conclusion that the detainee was indeed the person sought by the Russian Federation.

The court also rejected Berezovsky’s argument that the statute of limitations for prosecution of these crimes under Russian law had expired. The district court considered this issue, even though it had not been raised during the hearings, and took into account the provisions of Russian law concerning, in particular, statutes of limitations and the grounds for their suspension. The Supreme Court was not provided with any evidence indicating that the lower court’s approach was erroneous.

The court also rejected Berezovsky’s argument that, after more than 16 years, evidence might have been lost or destroyed, and witnesses might have become unavailable. The court noted that he had not provided any specific information confirming the death or emigration of witnesses, nor the loss or destruction of key evidence. General references to possible ill-treatment in Russia were also deemed insufficient.

The decision noted that following the Russian Federation’s withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights, assurances provided by Russian authorities can no longer be considered sufficient on their own. At the same time, in the court’s view, this does not mean that any extradition to Russia is ruled out. The person whose extradition is sought must provide specific evidence demonstrating a real and clear risk of a violation of his or her human rights.

The court also rejected Berezovsky’s claim, filed under the Fugitive Extradition Act, that extradition would be an unfair and unduly harsh measure. In doing so, the court took into account, in particular, his attitude toward the case and his conduct (as assessed by the District Court), as well as the fact of his long-standing “disappearance” and the efforts of the Russian authorities to locate and bring him to justice.

The court concluded that the evidence available to the District Court supported its findings, that the decision on extradition and detention was lawful, and ruled to keep Yevgeny Berezovsky in custody until his extradition.

Source: the Telegram channel Offshorechannel.