The High Court has refused a man’s request for information and materials relating to his 2015 detention in Donegal, which he wanted to use in opposing his surrender under a European Arrest Warrant (EAW). The court held that he had not established a legal duty requiring the Gardaí or Minister for Justice to provide the materials before the surrender proceedings.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Donnelly on 11 February 2019, concerned an EAW issued by a United Kingdom authority seeking the man’s surrender for prosecution over alleged attempted murder of a serving Police Service of Northern Ireland officer and alleged possession of explosives with intent to endanger life. Those allegations have not been determined in this judicial review judgment.
The applicant said he had been arrested under section 30 of the Offences Against the State Act at Milford Garda Station in June 2015, interviewed and required to provide forensic samples. He sought his custody record, details of samples and seized items, statements and recordings, arguing that the information could help him challenge surrender on constitutional and fair-procedure grounds. He also relied on the EU Directive on the right to information in criminal proceedings.
The custody record had been provided before the hearing, so the court said it was unnecessary to consider that request further. On interview recordings, the judge held that section 56 of the Criminal Justice Act 2007 did not permit the applicant to demand them as of right. The statutory route for a court to direct access applied to a person before a court charged with an offence; the applicant was not charged in this jurisdiction. The court said any entitlement to recordings could be determined if a request were made in the EAW proceedings, but refused an order compelling their provision in this case.
On the other information sought, the judge found no explicit and unambiguous legal duty on the respondents to provide it in advance of the EAW hearing. The applicant had not identified a specific breach of his constitutional rights during detention or laid a factual basis showing a real risk that surrender would violate those rights. The court described the claim as speculative and said any rights-based objection could be raised within the surrender proceedings, including under section 37 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003.
The judge also rejected the reliance on the EU Directive. She followed the earlier High Court decision in *Minister for Justice v E.P.*, holding that the relevant right of access to documents did not apply to a person arrested under an EAW. The court noted that materials had been transferred to Northern Ireland under mutual-assistance requests, but found no sufficient basis to conclude that the transfers unlawfully interfered with the judicial review proceedings.
The court refused all relief sought. The judgment did not determine whether the applicant would ultimately be surrendered under the EAW.