Appeal against UK extradition rejected

A Limerick man wanted in Britain for questioning in connection with a murder in London has lost a Supreme Court attempt to secure his release.

However, while rejecting the challenge by Kenneth Dundon, Mr Justice Hugh Geoghegan noted his application had thrown up "very serious issues" relating to the effectiveness and enforcement of the European arrest warrant procedure.

This process altering the extradition arrangements within the EU was speeded up in the wake of the September 11th, 2001, attacks. In this country, the Oireachtas enacted the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 (the 2003 Act).

Mr Dundon (46), formerly of Hyde Road, Limerick city and also with an address at Pearson Street, London E2, appeared before the High Court in February 2004 after being arrested some hours earlier outside Limerick District Court on foot of a European arrest warrant.

The warrant sought Mr Dundon's extradition for questioning in connection with the murder of Christopher Jacob (50), of Hoxton, London, who died on October 9th, 2003, after being stabbed in the face.

In May 2004, the High Court ordered his extradition and the Supreme Court on March 16th last dismissed Mr Dundon's appeal against that order.

On the same day, Mr Dundon brought proceedings under Article 40 of the Constitution challenging the legality of his detention. In a number of judgments yesterday, the five-judge court rejected the application.

Mr Justice Geoghegan said Mr Dundon's argument was that, although the 2003 Act did not expressly say so, he was entitled to be released if a final decision on his extradition had not been made within 60 days of his arrest.

While the 2003 Act was "not happily drafted", the judge said the primary issue in the case was the meaning of a framework decision of June 13th, 2002 relating to the European arrest warrant and surrender procedures between EU member states.

The judge said Mr Dundon was arrested in Limerick on February 11th, 2004 and remanded in custody to February 27th, 2004, the date when, under provisions of the 2003 Act, the High Court was required to make a decision on his extradition. However, no decision was made on that date and the application was adjourned several times with Mr Dundon remanded in custody. The reason for the adjournments was related to the form of undertakings from the UK authorities which were required by the 2003 Act.

In May 2004, the High Court decided the undertakings complied with the 2003 Act and ordered Mr Dundon's surrender and he was again remanded in custody. The judge said the correct question for the court to decide was whether - after the period of 60 days has elapsed and where an extension of that period has not been sought - the duty to execute the warrant ceases.

Mr Justice Geoghegan said he was satisfied that, on the expiration of the 60-day period, the duty to execute the warrant continues. He believed the 60-day time limit, and the provision for that to be extended to 90 days, were imposed with a view to internal discipline within EU member states and not with a view to conferring individual rights in individual cases.