The High Court has ruled that surrendering James Corry to Germany for prosecution over an alleged attempted bombing of an army barracks is not prohibited. The court found that German authorities were responsible for a ten-year delay in seeking his arrest in Ireland, but concluded that the public interest in prosecution outweighed the effect on his personal and family life.
The European arrest warrant alleges that Corry jointly decided to carry out an attack on the British Army barracks in Osnabrück, Germany, on 28 June 1996. The judgment describes three mortar shells, each containing 70kg of explosives, being launched at the barracks. Corry has never been prosecuted in Ireland over the allegations. The German warrant seeks his surrender for prosecution; the High Court made no finding that he committed the offence.
Corry was arrested in Ireland in 1996 on an earlier German extradition request and spent four months in custody. His release followed his declaration of Irish citizenship, which prohibited extradition under the law then in force. He was questioned in Ireland in 2000 on suspicion of an explosives offence and released without charge. A German European arrest warrant issued in October 2004, but was transmitted to Ireland in 2015. Corry was arrested in October that year after the warrant was endorsed by the High Court.
The court found that Interpol Dublin had given German authorities Corry’s current Kerry address in May 2005 and told them he had previously been arrested in Ireland on Germany’s request. The German authorities did not send the warrant through official channels until 2015. The judge attributed the ten-year delay to their failure to act on the 2005 information, describing it as negligence or omission. However, she accepted that Germany had continued to seek Corry through international and national databases and had not deliberately decided to abandon the request.
In weighing the delay, the court said it reduced the weight of the public interest but did not extinguish it. The judge considered the seriousness of the alleged violent offence, Corry’s family circumstances, his earlier custody, the second surrender request and the passage of time. She found no particular harmful consequences that made surrender disproportionate under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights or the Constitution.
The court also rejected the argument that the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement’s early-release provisions made surrender oppressive or discriminatory. It said the agreement did not apply to a person convicted and sentenced in Germany as such, though it might become relevant if a convicted person were transferred to Ireland.
The judgment concluded that surrender was not prohibited and that an order could be made under section 16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The cited conclusion does not itself state that the surrender order was made.