The High Court has dismissed Stephen Andrew McLaughlin’s objections to surrender to the United Kingdom on two Trade and Co-operation Agreement warrants. In a judgment delivered on 14 June 2024, Mr Justice Patrick McGrath said he proposed to make an order under section 16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 for surrender on both warrants. The judgment records the dismissal of the objections and the proposal to order surrender; it does not record the making of the final surrender order.
The first warrant seeks McLaughlin’s surrender for prosecution in Northern Ireland over seven alleged offences said to arise from an incident at Ness Woods Country Park, Derry, on 19 September 2022. The allegations include attempted murder, threats to kill, assaults, criminal damage and dangerous driving. The judgment describes an alleged attack on his former partner in front of their children. These matters remain allegations; the court was deciding the surrender request, not the criminal charges.
McLaughlin argued that no decision had been made to charge and try him, and that a possible extended custodial sentence could involve preventative detention contrary to his rights. The judge found that the warrant was issued for prosecution and that the evidence did not rebut the statutory presumption that a decision to charge and try had been made. The court also rejected the sentence objection, finding the claim speculative and unsupported by evidence showing a likely sentence or a risk of denial of fundamental rights. A separate family and private life objection, raised in relation to both warrants, was also dismissed.
The second warrant seeks McLaughlin’s return to serve the remaining part of a sentence imposed in 2016 for conspiracy to facilitate a breach of immigration law. The warrant states that 341 days remained as of 11 February 2024. The underlying conviction concerned a smuggling operation involving Afghan nationals found at Tilbury Port and at the French Eurotunnel terminal. The judge held that the conduct described could correspond to an offence under Irish law, including conduct outside the State, and that the statutory bar relating to offences committed outside the issuing state did not prevent surrender.
The court also rejected objections about credit for time in custody and uncertainty over the second warrant. It found no real concern that the UK would fail to deduct detention time as required by the Trade and Co-operation Agreement, and said the warrant clearly sought service of the remaining sentence rather than prosecution for being unlawfully at large.