The High Court has refused an application to surrender Marian Dicu to Romania, finding substantial grounds to believe he would face a real risk of detention conditions that would violate his rights under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Minister for Justice and Equality sought Dicu’s surrender under a European arrest warrant issued in June 2018. The warrant sought his return to serve a two-year sentence imposed in Romania for offences arising from events on 30 December 2015. The judgment says he appeared at both his trial and appeal and was represented by his chosen lawyer.
The Romanian authorities said Dicu would initially spend 21 days in Bucharest-Rahova prison, with 3 square metres of personal space, before likely serving the rest of his sentence in a semi-open regime at Bucharest-Jilava prison. There, the available space was stated to be 2 square metres, including furniture but excluding sanitation. The court noted that he had about 13 months left to serve if surrendered at that stage.
The court sought further information about conditions and improvements at both prisons after considering European Court of Human Rights decisions that had found Article 3 violations relating to detention conditions there. The Romanian authority provided general descriptions of facilities and some improvements, but did not specifically explain what measures had been taken to address the shortcomings identified in those decisions. Nor did it assure the court that Dicu would not spend a prolonged period in a cell with less than 3 square metres of personal space.
The judge accepted that Dicu would have substantial freedom of movement and access to activities outside his cell. But he found that the 2-square-metre allocation would last for an extended period and that other aggravating conditions identified in the European court’s decisions remained relevant. Taken together, those factors established a real risk of detention conditions violating Article 3.
The court rejected Dicu’s other objections, including challenges concerning the warrant’s description of the offences, correspondence with offences in Ireland, credit for time spent in custody here, and alleged interference with family rights. It held that the assurances about sentence credit should be accepted and that no evidence had been provided to support the family-rights objection.
The application was refused because surrender was prohibited under section 37 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The court did not order Dicu’s surrender.