The European Commission has criticised Ireland for failing to properly implement the European arrest warrant, a key tool used to fight organised crime and terrorism.
In a report published yesterday, the commission said it "very much regrets" that the length of time taken to execute these warrants in the Republic often exceeds the 90-day limit allowed under EU law. Britain is also failing to meet the strict EU deadlines, says the report, which otherwise notes the system is working well throughout Europe.
The European arrest warrant is a legal instrument that enables EU states to ask the judicial authorities in other member states to arrest and surrender criminal suspects.
During 2005 more than 6,900 warrants were issued by EU states, which led to 1,700 arrests throughout Europe and 1,532 people being surrendered to other countries.
Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini urged Irish judges to place their trust in the European arrest warrant, which was agreed by EU ministers for justice in 2002 and introduced in the Republic in 2004.
"It isn't in the interests of Ireland to have to wait 13 months for the execution of an arrest warrant," he said. "I don't think it is necessary to blame Ireland or Britain but it is necessary to encourage them to use the system."
Statistics compiled by the commission show the Irish authorities executed just 19 of the 67 warrants received from other member states in 2005. This resulted in 18 people being arrested and just seven people being surrendered to the authorities in other jurisdictions.
The process of surrendering a person who did not want to leave Ireland could take a year, says the report, which notes a large number of outstanding cases.
An EU official said one problem in the Republic is related to an "endorsement" process, whereby the Irish authorities scrutinise each arrest warrant and often request additional information or a new warrant before presenting the case to the High Court. The commission says this process is unnecessary.
A Government spokeswoman said proposed amendments to the legislation in the Republic would mean in the future "that a technical defect in requests for surrender shall not be a ground under which the Courts will refuse to surrender a person".
But aside from the technical problems that can delay execution of warrants, there are also concerns that judges in some states do not trust their EU counterparts. Some states are reluctant to extradite their own citizens and have introduced checks and conditions that are not compatible with European legislation, according to the report.
New statistics provided by the Department of Justice show that since the start of the year 77 per cent of arrest warrants have been endorsed by the High Court within one month of receipt by the Irish authorities. Since 2004 323 warrants have been received from EU states.
The High Court has endorsed 237 warrants and 84 persons have been surrendered. Surrender was refused in 10 cases. In addition 59 warrants were withdrawn at various stages of the process.
CASE STUDY
A European Arrest Warrant case that provoked an international rift between Ireland and the Czech Republic involves the suspected criminals Maros Sulej and Tomas Puta.
In 2005, the Czech authorities sought to have both men extradited from Ireland. But anomalies in the way the Czech government implemented its European arrest warrant legislation led to a refusal from the Irish authorities to detain the men.
The Czech government passed amending legislation in July 2006 enabling the Irish authorities finally to arrest the suspects last year and start the surrender process.
The High Court ordered the surrender of both men on April 24th. They have appealed this decision to the Supreme Court and are awaiting judgment.
A separate appeal against their extradition to the Czech constitutional court was thrown out this week in the Czech Republic.
Another case that has provoked concerns in Hungary relates to a senior manager with Irish Life who was convicted in his absence in Hungary of negligent driving causing the deaths of two children.
In January, Mr Justice Michael Peart in the High Court refused an application by the Hungarian authorities for the extradition of Ciarán Tobin due to technical problems with the European Arrest Warrant. The judge said his refusal was based on his finding that Mr Tobin's departure from Hungary could not be defined as "fleeing", as had been contended on the warrant.
Mr Justice Peart said he accepted Mr Tobin's argument that he and his family left Hungary, on November 30th, 2000, following the completion of his work in that country, and that he never fled Hungary at any time before the start of any sentence imposed on him.
Mr Tobin was convicted in his absence by a Hungarian court in 2002 of negligent driving causing death.