The High Court rejected Darren James Gleeson’s argument that his 2017 conviction for membership of the Irish Republican Army in the State barred his surrender to Northern Ireland over alleged activity there in 2014. The court did not make a final surrender order on 22 July 2019: it requested more information about two charges and adjourned the application to 31 July.
The European arrest warrant, issued by a Northern Ireland Magistrate’s Court on 30 January 2019, concerns alleged activity between 12 August and 3 October 2014. It alleges that Gleeson attended meetings at an address in Newry and includes a charge of belonging to the Continuity Irish Republican Army, as well as other alleged offences.
Gleeson had pleaded guilty at the Special Criminal Court on 1 November 2017 to membership of the IRA within the State on 18 May 2017. He was serving the resulting prison term. His position was that membership was a continuing offence and the earlier conviction prevented another prosecution for belonging to the same organisation.
Mr Justice Alexander Owens held that the two cases concerned separate alleged acts in different years and jurisdictions. The 2017 conviction related to adherence within the State and could not have covered the alleged Newry activity in 2014. The warrant contained no charge relating to the conduct behind that conviction. The judge rejected the argument under section 41(1) of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 and concluded that a trial in Northern Ireland on the alleged 2014 conduct would not duplicate prosecution for the same offence.
The judge explained that membership offences may involve participation in an organisation’s activities over a period, but that does not mean a conviction for one period bars a prosecution based on alleged participation during a different period. He also considered that the warrant’s description supported charges including belonging to a proscribed organisation, conspiracy and attending two alleged terrorist meetings. Supplementary information addressed the allegation that Gleeson possessed documents likely to be of use to terrorists.
The court directed the issuing state to provide information about alleged instruction or training in making or using firearms and explosives at the Newry meetings, and what supported the legal requirements for the training-related charges. It adjourned the application, remanded Gleeson in custody, and said it intended to direct surrender on 31 July if the outstanding information was provided. That intended direction was not a surrender order made on 22 July.