Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 May 1999

Vol. 504 No. 2

Written Answers. - Extradition Warrants.

Denis Naughten

Ceist:

60 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason a person arrested in connection with a murder (details supplied), and subsequently released due to legal inadequacies in the extradition warrant from the RUC, has not been re-arrested; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11452/99]

The first point to be made is that there was no inadequacy in the extradition warrant in this case.

In February 1993 warrants were received from the RUC seeking the extradition of three persons in connection with the murder of a person in Northern Ireland. The extradition of all three persons was subsequently ordered by the District Court and all three appealed these orders. Following High Court and Supreme Court appeals, two of the persons were extradited. In respect of the third person, who is the subject of this question, the High Court discharged the order of the District Court and directed his release. The State's appeal against this decision was dismissed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court's reasons for the decision reached are set out in its judgment – see Larkin v. O'Dea [1 995] 2 I.R.500.

Subsequent to the Supreme Court decision, the Attorney General's office in London contacted the Irish Attorney General's office and both Offices were of the view that a further application for the extradition of the person concerned in connection with this murder charge would not succeed.

Under Irish law a prosecution in this jurisdiction for murder committed in Northern Ireland is possible. The taking of prosecutions is a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions but, of course, the Director can only act on the basis of a sufficiency of evidence. It would not be appropriate for me, as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to comment in relation to the possibility of a prosecution in this case other than to draw attention to the fact that the Supreme Court has held that the evidence gathered during the applicant's detention would be inadmissible at any trial of the applicant within the State.

Barr
Roinn