The main objects of the Bill are, first of all, to put our general extradition law on an up-to-date basis; secondly, to make fresh provision for the enforcement here of British criminal warrants, which have been unenforceable since last July, following a decision of the Supreme Court; and, thirdly, to provide for the enforcement of Northern Ireland warrants.
The extradition of offenders other than to Britain and Northern Ireland is dealt with in Part II of the Bill. In drafting this Part we have in general followed the text of the European Convention on Extradition, a multilateral Convention prepared under the auspices of the Council of Europe and opened for signature in 1957. It came into force in 1960 and has so far been ratified by six member States of the Council, namely, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Norway, Sweden and Turkey. It is proposed that, when the Bill becomes law, the Convention will be ratified by this country and that, on ratification, an order will be made by the Government under section 8 of the Bill. The effect of that order will be to bring into force as between ourselves and the countries which have already ratified the Convention, reciprocal arrangements for the extradition of offenders in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. Subsequently, negotiations will be commenced with other countries with a view to making appropriate extradition arrangements with them as well.
In this connection I think I should say that the Bill has been made as flexible as possible to facilitate the making of extradition arrangements with as many countries as possible notwithstanding that the extradition practice of some countries may not be quite in accordance with that of the Convention. This is, of course, subject to the maintenance of certain minimum standards, such as the prohibition on the extradition of political offenders, which the Bill insists upon. For example, some countries insist that before a person is extradited from their territory, sufficient evidence must be produced which would, according to their own law, justify the person claimed being committed for trial if the offence of which he is accused had been committed in their own territory. That is, in fact, the position under the present law, contained in the Extradition Act, 1870, and in the law of countries following the Anglo-American tradition in this respect. In many other countries, including most European continental countries, evidence that a warrant has been issued by a competent court or authority for the arrest of a person in respect of a criminal offence, together with evidence that the offence is an offence under the law of both the requesting and the requested country, is sufficient. Some countries will not allow the extradition of their nationals in any circumstances; others are prepared to do so.
Under Part II we shall, as I have said, be in a position to negotiate agreements with countries with varying practices and traditions. We shall be free to conclude extradition agreements, on a reciprocal basis, with Governments whose law requires a prima facie case to be furnished and with those countries who are prepared to allow their nationals to be extradited. Any order made by the Government giving any such arrangement the force of law must be laid before each House of the Oireachtas as soon as may be after it is made and there is the usual provision for having it annulled by resolution by either House of the Oireachtas.
If previous experience is any guide, however, it is not likely that Part II of the Bill will be availed of to any great extent in practice, though in legislating for the future it is reasonable to proceed on the basis of increased commercial contacts with foreign countries and the increasing likelihood of international criminals coming on to our territory. The fact is that the Part of the Bill which will be more frequently used will be Part III, which sets out fresh arrangements for the enforcement here of warrants of arrest for ordinary criminal offences issued in Britain and provides for the extension of these arrangements to Northern Ireland. It may be anticipated that a hundred or so warrants will be executed here annually under these provisions, so that this is the portion of the Bill to which I expect Senators will devote the greatest attention. For this reason I think I should explain briefly the background to it.
Up to last year our warrants were executed in Britain, and British warrants were executed here, under the authority of the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, as adapted. An Extradition Bill had been introduced in the Dáil in 1963 which proposed to continue these more or less automatic arrangements for the enforcement of British warrants and for extending them to warrants issued in Northern Ireland. A number of safeguards were introduced by the 1963 Bill into the arrangements; these were based on recognised principles of international extradition practice. For example, extradition for political, revenue or military offences or for offences carrying less than three months was prohibited and restrictions were imposed on the endorsement of warrants for summary offences. Moreover, it was provided that any person arrested under a British or Northern Ireland warrant should be given a reasonable opportunity of consulting a solicitor if he desired to do so. After the Second Stage and Committee Stage had been agreed by the Dáil early in 1964, it was held, first of all in Britain by the House of Lords and then by our Supreme Court in unrelated habeas corpus actions, that the existing arrangements were invalid. Since then British warrants have been unenforceable here. Our warrants remained unenforceable in Britain, too, for a short time after the court decision I have referred to but the British authorities, as a temporary measure, were able to make an Order in Council which was effective to make our warrants enforceable again in Britain. At the time they undertook to introduce legislation to replace the 1851 Act procedure, and the necessary Bill, which has been the subject of discussions between ourselves and the British authorities, has passed the British House of Lords and is expected to pass their House of Commons shortly.
As a result of the court decisions to which I have referred and of the discussions with the British authorities, Part III of the present Bill provides for further and extensive modifications of the former arrangements for the enforcement of British warrants and requires that every person arrested under such a warrant must be brought before the district court and that he must be allowed a period of at least fifteen days to consider whether he wishes to exercise his constitutional right of habeas corpus or the statutory rights given by section 50 of the Bill of applying to the High Court or to the Minister for Justice for a direction for release on various specified grounds, such as the political or military character of the offence. Of course, the person to whom the warrant relates may wish to leave the jurisdiction earlier and in that case he may consent to do so but his consent must be given before either a district justice or a peace commissioner. Moreover, a person may not be surrendered unless the offence is an offence under both our law and British law. The maximum penalty attaching to the offence for which a person may be surrendered is being raised from three months to six months and provision is being made for provisional arrest in the absence of the warrant in case of urgency. All these modified provisions will, of course, apply to the reciprocal arrangements we will be having with Northern Ireland for the first time since they ceased to operate some thirty-five years ago.
Both this measure and the earlier measure have been generally welcomed, especially, I think I can say, in so far as they propose to put an end to the present immunity enjoyed by persons accused of the most serious crimes who escape the consequences of their acts by merely crossing the Border. It is a matter for gratification also that we shall now be in a position to proceed to have extradition arrangements with other countries on the basis of a statute of the Oireachtas. I should like to acknowledge, and express my appreciation of, the co-operation we have received from the British and Northern authorities both in relation to the 1963 Bill and the Bill which the House has now before it. Such co-operation offers every prospect of our being able to secure in due course an arrangement for the reciprocal enforcement of court orders and judgments between our respective jurisdictions in non-criminal matters.
As soon as this Bill has become law, I propose to press ahead with arrangements for this extended co-operation in the legal field. I shall place emphasis on trying to get a scheme into operation as soon as possible for the enforcement of maintenance orders, that is to say, court orders for the support of married women and their children who have been deserted.
In conclusion, I should like to express the hope that the Bill will commend itself in principle to Senators as a necessary step in the promotion of the administration of justice between ourselves and other jurisdictions and that they will agree to give it a Second Reading.