Controversial extradition legislation under which Gary McKinnon, who has Asperger's syndrome, faces being sent for trial in the United States on computer hacking charges is not "lopsided" or biased against British citizens, a judge-led review will report on Tuesday.

The official review into the 2003 Extradition Act, which was conceived in haste in the aftermath of 9/11, has also come down against the introduction of a "forum bar" rule, which would ensure suspects were tried in the country where the bulk of their offences had been committed.

But the independent review, led by Lord Justice Scott Baker, does strongly criticise the time taken by the European court of human rights to hear human rights appeals over individual extradition cases. The report urges ministers to put stronger pressure on Strasbourg to speed up cases.

The controversial European arrest warrant, which enables suspects to be transferred to another EU state within 90 days of arrest, is also to be given a clean bill of health.

The judge-led review, which was carried out by a small panel of experts, looked at the "balance of effect and the provision of justice in the McKinnon case".

The 44-year-old from Wood Green, north London, faces extradition to stand trial for hacking into secret military computers. McKinnon says he was looking for evidence of UFOs.

McKinnon's supporters said the Scott Baker report was a "whitewash" because it failed to conclude that the US-UK extradition treaty made it easier to send Britons to stand trial in the US than for Americans to be extradited to the UK.

"I'm quite frankly shocked that anyone with any intelligence can have the audacity to come out and say that this treaty is equal," said McKinnon's mother, Janis Sharp. "Everyone knows it is a blatant whitewash produced to appease the Americans. My son Gary has lost almost 10 years of his life and has served a nine-and-a-half year sentence of psychological torture, despite the crown prosecuting service testifying to the court in 2009 that the US has provided not one shred of evidence of any extraditable offence … because they are not required to. For Gary these years have been akin to being on death row."

Home Office figures show up until June last year 62 people, 28 of them British, had been extradited from the UK to America since the legislation came into force. Thirty three people had been sent from America to Britain under the 2003 Act – three were US citizens.

The Scott Baker review was set up by David Cameron and Nick Clegg to implement a promise in the coalition agreement to review the operations of the act, which incorporates the UK-US treaty, to make sure it is even-handed.

It followed a Liberal Democrats 2010 manifesto commitment to "stop unfair extradition to the US". The Conservatives supported campaigns to prevent extradition in individual cases such as the NatWest Three and Gary McKinnon, but made no commitment to reform the legislation.

Critics of the extradition legislation claim the Anglo-American treaty is unfair because British citizens facing extradition do not enjoy the same degree of legal protection as Americans.

US authorities only have to outline the alleged offence, the punishment and provide an accurate description of the suspect. But for the British authorities to succeed they must prove the wanted person probably committed the crime – a much higher level of proof.

McKinnon's supporters had hoped at the very least Scott Baker would have endorsed the "forum bar to extradition" test, which is already on the statute book but has not yet been implemented. This would allow a court to block an extradition request if the conduct that led to the alleged crime took place while the person was in the UK, as in McKinnon's case. But it is understood that Scott Baker has rejected this approach.