The Court of Appeal has dismissed appeals by Sean Farrell and Ciarán Maguire against the refusal to order Gardaí to provide records from their 2015 detention, which they sought to help oppose European Arrest Warrants (EAWs).
The appeals concerned warrants issued in March 2017 for the men’s prosecution over alleged attempted murder of a PSNI member and possession of explosives with intent to endanger life. The allegations relate to an incident in Northern Ireland in June 2015. The men were arrested in Co Donegal that night on suspicion of unlawful-organisation membership, detained at separate Garda stations, interviewed and released without charge. The court did not determine the allegations in the warrants.
The men sought custody records, statements, details of samples and seized items, and audio or video interview recordings. They said the information could help them identify grounds to oppose surrender, including possible breaches of their constitutional rights during the earlier detention. Farrell also challenged the transfer of some material to Northern Ireland without notice. The respondents argued that no specific rights breach had been identified and that there was no legal entitlement to the requested material.
In a judgment delivered on 1 November 2019, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision refusing judicial review relief. It found that the men had not identified a specific breach of constitutional or legal rights, or established a real risk that surrender would violate their rights. Their claim that review of the records might reveal a ground for objection was speculative. The court found no explicit and unambiguous duty requiring the authorities to provide the material in advance of the EAW proceedings.
The court also rejected the argument that EU Directive 2012/13 required access to the requested records. It held that the Directive’s provisions on case documents and evidence did not apply to the men’s request arising from the concluded Irish investigation; the EAW-specific provision required a letter of rights. The men had not complained about information provided when arrested under the warrants.
On interview recordings, the court agreed that section 56 of the Criminal Justice Act 2007 gave no right to obtain them in these circumstances. It said a court could consider a request made during the EAW proceedings, but the men did not qualify for disclosure as of right in the judicial review case.
The court accepted that evidence, including DNA samples and original interview memoranda, had been transferred to Northern Ireland under mutual-assistance arrangements and the 2008 Act. No injunction had been sought to prevent transfer. The court said the samples could be sought for examination in the Northern Irish prosecution, if it proceeded, and copies of the interview memoranda remained in Ireland. It dismissed both appeals; it did not decide whether the men would be surrendered or the criminal allegations proved.