The Supreme Court upheld the discharge of Arnold Mallows from Mountjoy Prison after finding that State inaction left him in custody for about six months longer than necessary while awaiting extradition to England and Wales.
Mallows had been arrested in January 1999 on warrants concerning offences alleged to have occurred in England and Wales between 1992 and 1996. On May 10, 1999, the District Court ordered that he be delivered into the custody of Hertfordshire police and detained in Mountjoy pending his surrender.
Mallows then sought judicial review of those orders. His application was refused by the High Court on June 16, 1999. The Supreme Court accepted that it was reasonable for the State not to extradite him while that challenge and the period for appealing its refusal remained live, up to July 20.
The problem was what happened afterwards. The refusal order remained on Mallows' prison file, but the Chief State Solicitor's Office and Garda extradition authorities did not establish that the judicial review proceedings had ended. No effective step was taken to progress the extradition until Mallows' English solicitors contacted the authorities in December 1999 seeking his return to Britain.
The High Court subsequently ordered his discharge under section 53 of the Extradition Act 1965. That provision allowed a person to seek release where surrender had not taken place within one month and reasonable cause for the delay was not shown.
Mr Justice Murray said the State could not shift responsibility onto Mallows for failing to correct its mistaken belief that proceedings were still pending. The extradition legislation reflected a policy that people awaiting surrender, who had not been convicted, should not remain in detention longer than necessary.
The court described what occurred as a breakdown in the State system and found that Mallows spent six months in custody through State fault. It upheld the High Court's exercise of discretion and dismissed the State appeal.