The High Court has directed the surrender of Patryk Matysik to an authorised recipient for the Republic of Poland under a European Arrest Warrant. In a judgment delivered on 17 June 2015, Ms Justice Donnelly rejected his objections under sections 37 and 45 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, as amended.
The warrant, dated 9 June 2010, seeks Mr Matysik to serve a one-year custodial sentence imposed by the Regional Court in Glogów. The judgment says the sentence was originally imposed in 2004 with execution suspended for a three-year probation period. In 2006, the Polish court ordered the sentence to be executed after recording that Mr Matysik had not fulfilled obligations to repair damage and had avoided probation supervision. Mr Matysik disputed that account, saying in an affidavit that he was not notified of the relevant hearings or the reactivation of the sentence, had not evaded service and had not fled Polish authorities.
The warrant was endorsed for execution in Ireland on 26 January 2011. Mr Matysik had earlier been arrested and released on bail, then failed to attend the hearing of his surrender application. He was arrested again on 3 October 2014 and remained in custody until the application hearing on 8 May 2015.
The judge considered whether delay made surrender a disproportionate interference with his rights. She noted that Poland had searched for him, received information that he was in Ireland and continued seeking him. The sentence related to two offences classified on the warrant as swindling. The judge found the offences and combined sentence were not insignificant, and that the need for surrender outweighed the delay. She also found that Mr Matysik had not established substantial grounds for believing he faced a real risk of an egregious breach of fair-trial rights if surrendered.
The court separately held that surrender was not prohibited by section 45, applying reasons set out in a judgment delivered the same day in Minister for Justice, Equality & Law Reform v A.P.L. It also found the warrant endorsed in accordance with the Act, confirmed the respondent’s identity, and concluded that none of the other relevant statutory provisions required refusal. The order directs surrender to a person duly authorised by Poland to receive him.