The High Court has declined to surrender P.K. to the United Kingdom to face trial on two alleged indecent assaults, finding that unexplained administrative delay and serious recent family circumstances made surrender disproportionate.
In a judgment delivered on 3 March 2016, Mr Justice Hunt rejected the respondent’s argument that his age at the time of the alleged offences barred surrender under section 43 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The court said the provision concerned whether proceedings could be initiated in Ireland because of age. In 1994, a child aged between seven and 14 benefited from a presumption of incapacity, but proceedings could still be brought and the presumption tested. The judge added that, even if further evidence were required to show the presumption could be rebutted, the allegations described in the warrant provided a basis on which a jury could reach that conclusion. The age objection therefore did not prevent surrender.
The warrant sought P.K.’s return for trial over allegations that he assaulted his six-year-old stepsister twice in 1994, when he was about 14. The allegations have not been tried. P.K. denied them in a police interview in 2013. The judgment records that the complainant reported the allegations in 2011, 17 years after the alleged events.
The court found significant administrative delay after the complaint was made. It said authorities had not adequately explained the roughly two years before P.K. was interviewed, despite evidence that he lived openly in Dublin and cooperated with police. The judge also criticised the further delay between the August 2013 interview and the 2015 arrest and European arrest warrants. The explanation that authorities had difficulty obtaining a passport photograph did not withstand scrutiny, he said. The delays considerably diluted the public interest in surrender, which the court assessed as moderately strong at most.
P.K. relied on his family life and responsibilities in Ireland. A further affidavit described a serious sexual assault on one of his teenage daughters in January 2016 and the family’s need for his support. The judgment recounts those matters as evidence presented by P.K.; it does not make findings about the alleged assault or the people said to be involved.
The court held that these recent circumstances were sufficiently serious and burdensome to outweigh the diminished public interest in surrender, particularly given the administrative delay. It therefore declined to order surrender on the delay objection. The judgment records that on 7 April 2016 the case was certified as suitable for appeal to the Court of Appeal; it does not state the result of any appeal.