r country. See Def. Mot., Exs. T, U, V. As the Government points out in its brief, however, the legal weight of the waivers is, at best, contested. The French Ministry of Justice, for instance, indicated in a letter submitted in conjunction to the Government's opposition that the French Code of Criminal Procedure "absolutely

s "highly unlikely" that the French government would refuse to extradite Ms. Maxwell (Def. Mem., Ex. V at 2), the government attaches a letter from the French Ministry of Justice ("MOP') that references neither Mr. Julie's report nor Ms. Maxwell, but states generally that the French Code of Criminal Procedure "absolutely pro

s "highly unlikely" that the French government would refuse to extradite Ms. Maxwell (Def. Mem., Ex. V at 2), the government attaches a letter from the French Ministry of Justice ("MOJ") that references neither Mr. Julie's report nor Ms. Maxwell, but states generally that the French Code of Criminal Procedure "absolutely pro

s citizens under French legislation. In accordance with this French constitutional rule, the administrative circular of 11 March 2004, published by the French Ministry of Justice, which aims at specifying how the then recently amended legal provisions regarding extradition should apply and be understood, states the following

s "highly unlikely" that the French government would refuse to extradite Ms. Maxwell (Def. Mem., Ex. V at 2), the government attaches a letter from the French Ministry of Justice ("MOJ") that references neither Mr. Julie's report nor Ms. Maxwell, but states generally that the French Code of Criminal Procedure "absolutely pro

e de droll penal et de procedure penale Extradition Pa. - Conditions de fond de l'estradition Delphine Brach-Thiel-October 2t I 8„f59). 18. Third, the French Ministry of Justice's interpretation is contradicted by precedents and case law 19. The French Ministry of Justice's interpretation finds no support in case law, as no