The High Court has ordered the surrender of a man to Poland under a European arrest warrant so he can serve the remainder of a one-year prison sentence imposed in 2003.
Mr Justice Paul Burns gave the ruling on 16 March 2021. The warrant, issued on 18 March 2020, sought the respondent to serve 11 months and 28 days. The court said he was arrested and brought before it on 22 January 2021. His identity as the person named in the warrant was not contested.
The respondent argued that surrender would unjustifiably interfere with his private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In affidavits, he said he had moved to Ireland in 2005 after struggling with drug addiction, had since worked for the same supermarket chain and was now a supervisor. He and his partner, who later became his wife, have a son born in Ireland in 2009 and live in rented accommodation. He said his family relied on his income and faced eviction if he were surrendered, and that he feared imprisonment could lead to a relapse. His partner supported his account. His solicitor said efforts to obtain a medical report had been unsuccessful.
The judge acknowledged the long gap between the offending and the warrant, as well as the respondent’s efforts to rebuild his life. But he found that the delay was not, by itself, so egregious as to justify refusing surrender, and that the personal and family circumstances were not truly exceptional under section 37 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The court also said there was no evidence that the respondent’s health or addiction needs could not be met if surrendered.
The warrant described two offences. The judgment noted ambiguity over whether the issuing authority had relied on the European arrest warrant procedure for a listed category of offence, but said it was unnecessary to resolve that issue because both offences corresponded to offences under Irish law. The judgment identified the first as corresponding to theft and the second to attempted deception and/or offences involving stolen property.
The respondent had also objected on the basis of prison conditions in Poland, but his counsel accepted at the hearing that the evidence did not warrant further inquiry. The court dismissed the objections and ordered surrender under section 16(1). It said decisions about how long he would actually spend in detention were for the Polish authorities.