But human rights groups and legal experts have long expressed concern over the lack of transparency in China's Communist Party-controlled judiciary, and frequent reports of confessions obtained under duress or through torture. Under the "no evidence" approach consistent with international standards to extradition requests, Australia will take Chinese extradition requests at face value, without assessing the individual's guilt or innocence. The committee's report itself says it does not "dismiss concerns over the lack of transparency in the Chinese justice system, allegations of the ill-treatment and torture of prisoners, and the continuing imposition of the death penalty". But it cited the Attorney-General's Department in emphasising that "as links between [China and Australia] grow, it is in Australia's interest to have a framework to be able to work in partnership with China in the fight against crime". "Australia does not wish to become a safe haven for people who commit serious offences and it must be able to bring back individuals from foreign countries who have offended against Australian law," the report said.

As is consistent with extradition treaties with other countries, Australia reserves the right to refuse extradition if the offence carries the death penalty, though this can be circumvented if China provides an undertaking that it will not impose or carry out the death penalty. Extradition can also be refused if there are fears of political or religious persecution, torture or cruel and inhuman punishment. But the Law Council of Australia has maintained undertakings from China not to carry out the death penalty are not legally enforceable. "There is no consequence," it said in its submission earlier this year. What is Australia going to do? What is the reality? Is Australia going to try to haul China before the International Court of Justice? It is a joke." In its dissenting report, Labor recommended that binding treaty action be delayed until an independent review of Australia's entire extradition system was carried out to ensure it remained consistent with international legal obligations and community expectations regarding the rule of law and human rights.

"Extradition is more than an expression of comity between two nations," the dissenting report said. "It involves serious questions of human rights. In surrendering an individual to another nation, Australia is placing faith in the adequacy and propriety of their criminal justice system." Australia has an extradition treaty with China that was signed in 2007 but never ratified. The agreement, however, was tabled in March for the committee's consideration, a month before Malcolm Turnbull's first visit to China as Prime Minister. Beijing has placed high priority on securing extradition treaties and further law enforcement co-operation with Western nations as it steps up its global efforts to repatriate corrupt Communist Party officials who have fled overseas. It has couched the extradition treaty as a natural progression from bilateral police co-operation and an international anti-corruption accord agreed at the 2014 APEC Summit in Beijing. Australian law enforcement agencies are also keen for China's help in stemming the flow of illicit drugs – particularly crystal methamphetamine – from southern China.

During a visit to China last month, Justice Minister Michael Keenan trumpeted a new deal on sharing information on financial crimes and lauded the efforts of joint police operation Taskforce Blaze in targeting the importation of illicit drugs from the mainland. "The government is keen to see it ratified, it is going through those parliamentary processes and we are keen to see this matter conclude through the ratification of that treaty, which has been on the agenda of our bilateral relationship for some time," Mr Keenan told reporters in Beijing at the time.