Harkin, Kevin Barry and Republic of Ireland

JurisdictionNorthern Ireland
JudgeMcCloskey LJ
Judgment Date27 September 2021
Neutral Citation[2021] NIQB 80
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland)
Date27 September 2021
1
Neutral Citation No: [2021] NIQB 80
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: McC11617
ICOS:
Delivered: 27/09/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
(DIVISIONAL COURT)
___________
ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT FOR THE DIVISION OF BELFAST
IN THE MATTER OF THE EXTRADITION ACT 2003
___________
BETWEEN:
KEVIN BARRY HARKIN
Appellant
-v-
REPUBLIC OF IRELAND
Respondent
________
Before: McCloskey LJ and Rooney J
_________
Representation
Appellant: Mr Sean Doherty, of counsel, instructed by Quigley, Grant and Kyle
Solicitors
Respondent: Mr Stephen Ritchie, of counsel, instructed by the Crown Solicitor’s
Office
_______
McCloskey LJ (delivering the judgment of the court)
Outline
[1] This renewed application for leave to appeal is brought by Kevin Barry
Harkin (“the appellant”). The application has its origins in a European Arrest
Warrant (“the warrant”) dated 4 September 2019 and signed by Mr Justice Binchy of
the High Court of Ireland (the “requesting state”). The warrant describes the
appellant as a male person of Irish nationality now aged 36 years and residing in
2
Derry. It is a so-called “accusation” warrant which seeks the extradition of the
appellant to the requesting state to be tried for offences of extortion and demanding
money allegedly committed in April 2016.
[2] The criminal process in the requesting state had reached the stage where the
appellant had been returned for trial. The warrant was precipitated by the appellant
absconding while on bail. A certificate from the NCA followed on 23 April 2020.
The execution of the warrant followed the arrest of the appellant on 6 August 2020 in
Northern Ireland in respect of suspected driving offences. This gave rise to a
prosecution resulting in a sentence of imprisonment.
[3] The appellant seeks to challenge the order of Her Honour Judge McCaffrey
(“the judge”) dated 1 June 2021 pursuant to her decision that he be surrendered to
the requesting state. In thus deciding and ordering the judge dismissed the
appellant’s case that his extradition would be incompatible with his rights under
Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR in breach of section 21A of the Extradition Act 2003 (the
2003 Act”) and section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Legal Framework
[4] The general legal framework was outlined in the recent decision of this court
in Dusevicius v Republic of Lithuania [2021] NIQB 60 at [66] [71]:
[66] The material provisions of the Extradition Act 2003
(the “2003 Act”) are reproduced in Appendix 3 to the
judgment in Mr M’s case. In brief compass:
i. 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
the alleged commission of the extradition offence or
becoming unlawfully at large: section 14.
ii. Where the request person is unlawfully at large or
has not been convicted the court must decide whether
the person’s extradition would be compatible with the
Convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998:
section 21(1) and section 21A(1)(a).
iii. In the case of an accused requested person the
court must also decide whether the person’s
extradition would be disproportionate taking into
account, so far as the court considers it appropriate,
any or all of the matters specified in section 21A(3).

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Republic of Poland and Robert Marek Kochanski
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland)
    • 27 Septiembre 2021
    ...The court will allow one week for written submissions on this issue. The judgment of this court in the case Republic of Ireland v Harkin [2021] NIQB 80, which was available two days after the hearing (on 27/09/21) but held back because we asked for a written submission on costs, should be f......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT