Federal Public Prosecutor Germany v Roisin McAliskey
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Burgess J |
| Judgment Date | 23 November 2003 |
| Neutral Citation | [2007] NICty 1 |
| Date | 23 November 2003 |
| Court | County Court (Northern Ireland) |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2007] NICty 1
Judgment: approved by the court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: County113
Delivered: 23/11/2007
IN THE COUNTY COURT FOR THE DIVISION OF BELFAST
BY THE RECORDER OF BELFAST
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER THE EXTRADITION ACT
2003 (“The 2003 Act”)
Between
The Federal Public Prosecutor Germany
Applicant
And
Roisin McAliskey
1. This is a request by the Federal Public Prosecutor Germany (the Applicant) for
the extradition of Roisin McAliskey (Ms McAliskey) who currently lives in
Coalisland, Northern Ireland, and who is alleged to have committed the crime
of attempted murder in the circumstances which I will set out below. A
request was made under the provisions of the 2003 Act and comes before me
as “the appropriate Judge” for extradition proceedings in Northern Ireland
under Section 139(1) of the 2003 Act.
2. The Applicant issued a warrant under Part I of the 2003 Act on 12 October
2006 for the arrest of Ms McAliskey, and on 29 November 2006 the Serious
Organised Crime Agency, which had been designated by the Secretary of State
(for the purposes of Part I of the 2003 Act) certified that the warrant was
issued by a judicial authority of a Category 1 territory which has the function
of issuing arrest warrants. That certificate also confirmed that by virtue of
Section 1 of that enactment, the Secretary of State had designated Germany for
the purposes of Part I of the 2003 Act.
3. The warrant was executed by the Police Service of No rthern Ireland on 21
May 2007 when Ms McAliskey was arrested. On the same day she was
brought before this Court pursuant to Section 4(3) of the 2003 Act. At that
hearing Ms McAliskey confirmed that she was the person in respect of whom
the Warrant was issued. The Court, without objection from the Applicant,
granted bail to Ms McAliskey.
2
The 2003 Act
4. By Section 10 of the 2003 Act if a person in respect of whom a Part I Warrant is
issued appears before ‘the appropriate judge’, the judge must decide “whet her
the offence specified in the Part I Warrant is an extradition offence.” In the
event it was agreed at the hearing on 21 May 2007 on behalf of Ms McAliskey
that the alleged offence of attempted murder is an extradition offence. This
was confirmed at the later substantive hearing. The decision being that for
the Court I confirm the offence for which the extradition is sought is an
extraditable offence. In those circumstances under Section 10(4) of the 2003
Act the judge is obliged to proceed under Section 11 of the 2003 Act.
5. The relevant part of Section 11 for the purposes of these proceedings provides
as follows:-
“11 Bars to extradition
(i) If the judge is required to proceed under this section he must
decide whether the person’s extradition to the Category 1
territory is barred by reason of –
(c) The passage of time.
(ii) Sections 12-19 apply to the interpretation of sub -section (1)
(iii) If the judge decides that any of the questions in sub -section (1)
are in the affirmative he must order the person’s discharge.
(iv) If the judge decides those questions are in the negative and the
person is accused of the commission of the extradition offence
but is not alleged to be unlawfully at large after conviction of it,
the judge must proceed under Section 21.”
6. For the purposes of these proceedings the next relevant section is Section 14
which provides:-
“14. Passage of Time
A person’s extradition to a Category 1 territory is barred by
reason of the passage of time if (and only if) it appears that it
would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him by reason of the
passage of time since he is alleged to have committed the
extradition offence or since he is alleged to have become
unlawfully at large (as the case may be).”
7. Section 21 of the 2003 Act provides as follows:-
“21. Human Rights
(i) If the judge is required to proceed under this section (by
virtue of Section 11 or 20) he must decide whether the
person’s extradition would be compatible with the
To continue reading
Request your trial