The High Court has refused to surrender Dragan Rakanovic to Croatia, finding that information about likely detention conditions at Osijek Prison failed to rebut a strong presumption that his rights would be breached.
The decision, delivered by Ms Justice Melanie Greally on 28 June 2024, concerned a Croatian European Arrest Warrant seeking his surrender for prosecution on two alleged war crimes. The court rejected his objections concerning the warrant’s offence classification, the detail provided about the allegations, delay, family life and fair trial concerns. It refused surrender under section 37 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 because of the prison conditions objection.
The Croatian authorities confirmed that Mr Rakanovic would be detained at Osijek Prison but could not guarantee how many prisoners would share a cell. The smallest cell measured 6.43 square metres and the largest 36.77 square metres. The judge said that, assuming one prisoner above the stated capacity in each example, space would amount to about 2.14 square metres per person in the smallest cell and 2.83 square metres in the largest.
The court had sought further information after considering a 2023 report from the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, which described overcrowding as a serious problem in Croatia’s prison system. The Croatian response said reductions below 3 square metres would be short and that prisoners could be transferred if overcrowding persisted, but did not specify how long reductions might last or confirm they would be occasional and minor.
The authorities also said prisoners would have at least two hours of outdoor exercise each day, with other activities available, including work, visits, religious activities and counselling. The judge found that only the two hours of outdoor exercise were guaranteed daily. Meals were taken in cells, and the other activities depended on availability or prisoners’ choice. People not employed could therefore expect to remain in their cells for 22 hours a day on days without a visit or bathing.
The court concluded that the assurances did not establish that periods below the minimum space threshold would be short, occasional and minor, or that there would be sufficient movement outside cells to offset the restricted space. It found the information had not rebutted the strong presumption of a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In addressing the other objections, Justice Greally found that the Croatian authorities’ use of the European Arrest Warrant category for crimes within the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction was a manifest error because the alleged events were in 1991, before the court’s jurisdiction began. However, she found the described conduct corresponded to offences under Irish law. She dismissed the remaining objections, including the arguments based on delay and Article 8 family rights. The operative order was to refuse surrender on the prison conditions ground.