Duggan’s US Extradition Appeal Failed But Albanese Could Save Our Fellow Australian

The Federal Court has denied Australian citizen Dan Duggan’s appeal of former attorney general Mark Dreyfus’ 2024 decision to greenlight his extradition to the US on 2017 charges alleging he illegally trained Chinese military pilots. And while it’s understood the Trump White House has been sniffing around about getting its hands on him, our prime minister could still save the father-of-six.

Federal Court Justice James Stellios dismissed Duggan’s appeal on Thursday, 16 April 2026. Duggan’s main contention was that the 2017 District Court of Columbia grand jury indictment didn’t contain a “qualifying extradition offence”, as per section 22 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), because the actions that supposedly comprised a crime in the US weren’t unlawful here at time of commission.

This involves the legal principle of ‘dual criminality’, which subsection 19(2)(c) of the Extradition Act explains, involves the conduct that a foreign country seeks to extradite an Australian over having to be considered a criminal offence here as well.

Duggan argued that the treaty governing US-Australian extradition requires dual criminality to exist at the time of the alleged offending, but the judge found this wasn’t the case.

This saga has gone on for more than 1,270 days, according to Dan’s wife Saffrine. Duggan was arrested in October 2022 and has been remanded on no local charges ever since. The first Trump administration issued the indictment, but it was progressed under the Biden administration in 2022. And Dan is now set to be extradited to the whims of the authoritarian second Trump administration.

Following the decision, Duggan’s legals said their client now has 28 days to appeal this decision, which ultimately involved appealing the 2024 decision of NSW Local Court Magistrate Daniel Reiss to permit extradition. But Duggan’s legal defence seem more focused on highlighting the potential for PM Anthony Albanese to intervene and stop extradition, rather than the prospect of another appeal.

Albanese could save the Australian

“We just received the decision in the Duggan matter. The decision was based on solely a legal point. The merit issue has always been with the government,” Collaery Lawyers legal clerk Lynne Stocker told reporters, after the handing down of the ruling at the Federal Court of Australia, located on Ngunnawal and Ngambri land in Canberra.

“Now it is a decision for the prime minister on whether he wants to send an Australian citizen, who has already been in prison for three years and a half years, into the hands of the Trump administration, who has taken a close interest in this matter,” she explained and further added that they will be reviewing the day’s ruling and will consider options for appealing the outcome.

The attorney general makes the decision on extradition. But Stoker repeatedly stressed to the press that PM Albanese should be at play right now in saving her firm’s client from being presented on a platter to the lawless Trump administration. And when current AG Michelle Rowland was raised, Stoker reiterated that Albanese really needs to step up if the government is going to save Duggan.

Part of the reason that Rowland has been ruled out as being his lifeline, is that she was only appointed to the position of the nation’s chief lawmaker after Dreyfus had made the final determination, and she’s had little involvement in the case.

Dreyfus handled Duggan’s extradition process like the “Cowardly Lion”. He okayed the commencement of the extradition process on 28 December 2022, in between Christmas and New Years, while he greenlighted the final decision on 20 December 2024, just days before Christmas. 

“So, with the matter as it stands, with the close interest that the Trump administration has taken, this is now a matter for the prime minister,” Stoker made certain. And the legal clerk reiterated that it all boils down to whether Albanese feels confident in delivering and Australian over to the out-of-control Trump regime. 

Last minute dual criminality

Duggan served in the US marines over the 12 years ending in 2002, which was when he came to Australia, and eventually married Saffrine. Dan has been an Australia citizen since 2012. And over the months of April, May and November of 2012, he had been working on a temporary basis training foreign nationals on how to fly at the world-renowned Test Flying Academy of South Africa (TFASA).

The US claimed in the indictment that Dan conspired with eight others to teach Chinese nationals to fly, and they were military personnel. This is disputed by Dan and others at the school. And while British co-conspirators are listed and the UK determined to conduct its own inquiry into ex-military partaking in illegal flight training, no prosecutions were ever forthcoming.

Evidence before the court regarding Duggan’s dual criminality position comprised of an affidavit that had been attached to the 2017 indictment, which revealed jurors had requested a tolling period, or a pause to the five year statute of limitations on the charges against Dan. And this was granted so extra information could be obtained from Australia, which was delivered in March 2018.

The main charge against Duggan involves breaching the US International Traffic in Arms Regulation embargo on exporting US military services to China, via his supplying of pilot training. And to meet dual criminality in this case, the US based it on the local offence of military-style training involving a foreign government principal, contrary to section 83.3 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth).

Yet this Australian offence was not enacted until June 2018, as part of a suite of espionage and foreign interference laws, which was three months after the jury received its reply from Australian authorities and the year after the indictment had been sealed.

According to Cardinal Legal political analyst Dr Glenn Kolomeitz, who is part of the Duggan legal team, the only “reasonable inference” to come to is the grand jury tolling period scenario was sought to ensure that dual criminality was made out. And while it was, this dual criminality came after the tolling period had expired but several years before the indictment was unsealed and prosecuted.

Duggan argued the US-Australia treaty governing extradition between the two countries required dual criminality to be met at the time of the actual alleged offending. However, Justice Stellios found this is not the case, but rather, dual criminality only has to exist at the time that an extradition process is first initiated.

A political pawn in the leadup to war

Commentators such as Australian Greens Senator David Shoebridge, former Australian foreign minister Bob Carr and Dr Kolomeitz have all maintained that the case against Duggan commencing in 2017, was occurring at the same time when the build up to war against China began being progressed by the US and its allies. So, they consider Dan to be a political pawn in this matter.

The request to initially extradite under Biden had come when the US had a heightened focus on Beijing. Yet, now, a year into the second coming of the Trump administration, with its trashing of domestic and international law, its internal war on its own population, and its illegal wars in Venezuela, Iran and soon in Cuba, the prospect of extradition to the US is a much more severe fate.

“We are an Aussie family, who had our husband, my husband, father, son-in-law, our property and our feeling of safety stripped away from us,” Saffrine Duggan said, following the 16 April court decision. “Today, does not end our search for justice, for fairness and for the sovereignty that the Australian public expect.”

“We are very disappointed by this ruling, and we will consider our options carefully,” the mother-of-six continued. “But make no mistake, we will not give up. We will continue to advocate for Dan, especially with our government, asking them to protect Australia from US overreach and from malicious prosecution.”

“Dan was an ordinary Australian going about his business in Australia, when he was arrested by a foreign power,” she ended. “This has gone on long enough. Enough is enough.”