Minister for Justice and Equality v Hughes

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Paul Burns
• Judgment Date: 12 June 2020
• Neutral Citation: [2020] IEHC 299
• Date: 12 June 2020
• Docket Number: RECORD NUMBER 2020/86 EXT
• Court: High Court

BETWEEN

MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY

APPLICANT

AND

RONAN HUGHES

RESPONDENT

[2020] IEHC 299

Paul Burns J.

RECORD NUMBER 2020/86 EXT

THE HIGH COURT

European arrest warrant – Surrender – European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 s. 44 – Applicant seeking an order for the surrender of the respondent to the United Kingdom pursuant to a European arrest warrant – Whether the respondent’s surrender was prohibited by the provisions of s. 44 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003

Facts: The applicant, the Minister for Justice and Equality, applied to the High Court seeking an order for the surrender of the respondent, Mr Hughes, to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the UK) pursuant to a European arrest warrant dated 29th April, 2020 issued by District Judge King of Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court as the issuing judicial authority. The respondent’s sole ground of objection was that his surrender was prohibited by the provisions of s. 44 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, as amended.

Held by Burns J that the offences of manslaughter and conspiracy as set out in the warrant were alleged to have occurred within the UK; furthermore on the basis of the facts as set out in the warrant, the offences, if committed, did indeed occur in the UK, the issuing state. Burns J held that it follows that the respondent had failed to satisfy the first requirement of s. 44 and as the two requirements of the section are conjunctive, the respondent had failed to meet the conditions set out in s. 44. In such circumstances, s. 44 does not arise and Burns J dismissed the respondent’s objection in that regard. Burns J held that the surrender of the respondent was not prohibited by the provisions of part 3 of the 2003 Act.

Burns J held that the Court would make an order, pursuant to s. 16 of the 2003 Act, for the surrender of the respondent to the UK.

Application granted.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Paul Burns delivered on the 12th day of June, 2020.

1 By this application the Applicant seeks an order for the surrender of the Respondent to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“the UK”) pursuant to a European arrest warrant dated 29th April, 2020 (“the warrant”) issued by District Judge King of Chelmsford Magistrates' Court as the issuing judicial authority.

2 The warrant was endorsed by the High Court on the 29th April, 2020 and the Respondent was arrested and brought before the High Court on the same day, 29th April, 2020.

3 I am satisfied that the person before the Court is the person in respect of whom the warrant was issued. This was not put in issue by the Respondent.

4 I am further satisfied that none of the matters referred to in ss. 21A, 22, 23 or 24 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003, as amended, (“the Act of 2003”) arise and that the surrender of the Respondent is not prohibited for the reasons set forth therein.

5 The UK seeks the surrender of the Respondent for the purpose of prosecuting him in respect of 40 offences consisting of 39 charges of manslaughter contrary to Common Law which carry a maximum penalty of up to life imprisonment and a single charge of conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration under section 25 of the Immigration Act, 1971 contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act, 1977, which carries a maximum penalty of up to 14 years imprisonment. I am satisfied that the minimum gravity requirements of the Act of 2003 are met.

6 At section (e) iii of the warrant it is certified that the offence of manslaughter and conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration fall within article 2(2) of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European Arrest Warrant and the Surrender Procedures between Member States, as amended (“the Framework Decision”), and the relevant boxes are ticked for the following offences: participation in a criminal organisation; facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence; murder; grievous bodily injury. By virtue of section 38 of the Act of 2003 it is not necessary for the Applicant to show correspondence between an offence in the warrant and an offence under Irish law where the offence in the warrant is an offence to which article 2(2) of the Framework Decision applies. In this instance the issuing judicial authority has certified that the offences are offences to which article 2(2) applies and has indicated same by ticking the relevant boxes at section (e) iii of the warrant as aforesaid. There is nothing in the warrant that gives rise to any ambiguity or perceived manifest error, such as would justify this Court in looking behind the certification in the warrant. The correspondence issue was not pursued with any vigour at the hearing. Nevertheless, for the sake of completeness I point out that I am satisfied on reading the warrant as a whole that correspondence clearly exists in respect of the offence of manslaughter as defined in each state and that the alleged offence of conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration under s. 25 of the Immigration Act, 1971, contrary to s.1(1) of the Criminal Law Act, 1971, corresponds to the offence at Irish law of conspiracy contrary to section 71(1) of the Criminal Justice Act, 2006 to commit a serious offence, viz. an offence contrary to s. 2 of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act, 2000. That section provides:-

“2 (1)A person who organises or knowingly facilitates the entry into the State of a person whom he or she knows or has reasonable cause to believe to be an illegal immigrant or a person who intends to seek asylum shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable –

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €1500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both,

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to both.”

European Arrest Warrant Details

7 It is necessary to set out in detail certain contents of the warrant in this matter by reason of the nature of the issues raised and in particular the issue as to where the offences occurred or are alleged to have occurred.

8 At section (e) of the warrant under the heading “Offences” it is stated that the warrant relates to “in total: 40 offences”.

Under the heading “description of the circumstances in which the offence(s) was (were) committed, including the time, place and degree of participation in the offence(s) by the requested person”, the following appears:-

“Charges 1 – 39 manslaughter: between 22 and 24 October 2019 Ronan Hughes unlawfully killed 39 Vietnamese nationals who were found dead in the back of a trailer in the United Kingdom. The migrants had been brought into the UK illegally by Hughes and his co-conspirators. Vietnamese nationals require a Visa to enter the UK. Given the circumstances in which the victims were transported it follows that those involved were aware that they had no right to enter the UK.

Charge 40 conspiracy: between 1 May 2018 and 24 October 2019 Ronan Hughes conspired with others to facilitate the illegal entry of people including the 39 deceased persons into the UK. Migrants were smuggled into the UK from Belgium in commercial trailers owned or operated by Hughes. Hughes organised, paid for the travel and controlled the drivers who collected the migrants.

On 9 May 2018 a vehicle operated by Ronan Hughes and driven by Eamonn Harrison was found to be carrying 18 illegal Vietnamese migrants.

On 10 October 2019 Eamon Harrison delivered a trailer numbered T103 to Zeebrugge. The trailer travelled by sea to Purfleet in Essex, England, and was collected by Christopher Kennedy. Kennedy drove the trailer to Collingwood Farm, Essex. Witnesses saw a number of people alight from the trailer and get into cars that had followed the trailer to the farm. One of the cars was used by Gheorge Nica. It is believed that the people seen leaving the trailer were illegal migrants.

On 15 October 2019 Hughes arranged for his driver Maurice Robinson to deliver trailer number GTR128D to Harrison in France.

On 16 October 2019 Hughes travelled to Essex.

On 17 October 2019 Harrison collected cakes and biscuits in Belgium and drove to Dunkirk, France. There was no legitimate reason for him to have travelled to France. He then drove to Zeebrugge where it travelled by sea to the UK. Kennedy collected the trailer and drove to Collingwood Farm. Nica and Hughes also travelled to the farm at the same time. After leaving the farm Kennedy and Hughes travelled together to an industrial site where attempts were made to disguise the fact that people had been in the trailer. When Kennedy delivered the load to the intended recipient it was rejected due to signs that people had been in the container. Later that day Hughes returned to a hotel in Essex where he met Robinson and Nica. Nica was seen to give Hughes a bag. Later that day Robinson took the trailer GTR128D to Purfleet where it travelled to Belgium and was collected by Harrison.

On 22 October 2019 Harrison takes the trailer GTR128D to Dunkirk, France, where a witness saw people entering the trailer. As on 17 October Harrison had no legitimate reason to travel to France. Before taking the trailer to Zeebrugge, Harrison makes two stops in Belgium. Temperature readings within the trailer suggest that the doors were opened during these stops. The trailer travelled to Purfleet by sea. When booking the ferry, Hughes falsely declared that the trailer was carrying a load of biscuits. On 22nd October 2019 Robinson is waiting in Purfleet and is taken to Collingwood Farm. Robinson then collects the trailer from the port in Purfleet. In order to enter the port he uses a PIN number provided to Hughes by the ferry company. Robinson drives a short distance before opening the rear doors and discovers that the occupants, 39 Vietnamese men and women, are dead. Robinson first telephones Hughes and is then called by Nica who is in the vicinity....