The High Court has refused an application to release Hasnain Saqlain from Cloverhill Prison, finding his detention lawful while a surrender application relating to a UK European Arrest Warrant is pending.
Mr Justice Paul Coffey delivered the judgment on 19 March 2021 after directing an inquiry under Article 40.4.2° of the Constitution. The applicant had been arrested in the State on 25 February and remanded in custody the following day. He had not applied for bail.
The court rejected his argument that the warrant’s endorsement for execution in Ireland was invalid because Ireland had not opted into relevant provisions of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement. The judge said that argument had already been rejected in a separate High Court judgment, Shahzad v Governor of Mountjoy, delivered the same day.
The judge also said the applicant’s reliance on the Withdrawal Agreement’s post-transition arrangements was misplaced. The High Court endorsed the warrant on 14 December 2020, during the transition period, when the Framework Decision on European arrest warrants applied to the UK under the agreement. He found that the relevant transition provision was within the EU’s authority under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union and that the Protocol relied on by the applicant did not apply to it.
The court concluded that the UK had been lawfully designated under Irish legislation for the purpose of executing the warrant when it was endorsed. The endorsement was valid, and detention under it was lawful.
The applicant separately argued that surrender under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement would be unlawful because Ireland had not opted into its surrender provisions. The judge said that question concerned a possible surrender at an unknown future date and could be raised when the High Court considered the surrender application under section 16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. It was not a matter for relief in this constitutional detention inquiry.
The judge went on to consider that argument in the alternative, without deciding whether it was properly before him. He found that the TCA’s surrender provisions were binding and applicable to Ireland, and that they had been given effect in Irish law. The court refused the relief sought. The judgment did not decide the pending application to surrender the applicant.