The High Court has ordered the surrender of Iacob-Leontin Capra to Romania under a European Arrest Warrant, rejecting his objections concerning an in absentia revocation of a suspended sentence and a separate pending aggravated theft case.
In a judgment delivered on 16 June 2022, Ms Justice Caroline Biggs ordered surrender under section 16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The warrant, dated 26 January 2022, sought enforcement of a two-year-and-four-month prison sentence imposed in 2019 and activated in December 2021. Capra was arrested in Ireland on 18 March 2022.
The judgment recounts that the sentence followed convictions for driving without a licence. The original sentence was suspended, then activated after a further driving offence and later suspended again subject to conditions, including participation in a probation programme. The court said Capra failed to comply with programme requirements, including attendance at a reintegration programme and community service. The Romanian District Court then revoked the suspension in his absence.
Capra argued that the revocation engaged section 45 of the Act, which concerns surrender following certain decisions made in a person’s absence. He accepted that the revocation appeared to leave the original sentence unchanged. Justice Biggs said there was nothing to suggest the Romanian court had or exercised a power to materially alter it. The warrant stated that after surrender Capra would receive the decision and be informed of a right to retrial or appeal, with 10 days to request one. The judge concluded that surrender was not barred by section 45.
Capra also asked the High Court to seek an assurance that Romania would not prosecute him for an aggravated theft case mentioned in additional information from the issuing authority. That information said the case was pending before the Nasăud District Court and was in the “deliberation phase”.
The judge found no evidence that the issuing authority would breach the rule of specialty, which generally restricts prosecution after surrender for offences other than those covered by the warrant, subject to legal exceptions. Relying on mutual trust between EU member states, the court declined to send a further request for information and dismissed that objection.
The court concluded that surrender was not precluded under the 2003 Act. The judgment orders surrender to Romania; it does not determine the outcome of the separate aggravated theft proceedings.