Garland ruling may make extradition more difficult
ANALYSIS: Judge ruled offences carried out here, even if affecting other jurisdictions, should be prosecuted here
MR JUSTICE John Edwards ruled earlier this year that Seán Garland should not be extradited to the United States to face conspiracy charges in connection with the alleged forgery of US dollars.
While four main arguments were put forward by his legal team, the High Court judge just ruled on the first: that the offence involved was an offence in Ireland, and should be prosecuted here.
He stated that in this age of modern communications, where much serious fraud is transnational (the same could be said for internet crime), the common law must evolve to reflect the need to be able to prosecute in the jurisdiction where a substantial portion of the crime is committed.
Section 15 of the 1965 Extradition Act states: “Extradition shall not be granted where the offence for which it is requested is regarded under the law of the State as having been committed in the State.”
Mr Justice Edwards said it was necessary to combat procedural challenges to prosecutions with an extraterritorial element arguing that, for example, if money was lodged to an account abroad, the offence in fact took place there.
“The Irish courts should, as a matter of good sense in the times in which we live, be entitled to assert jurisdiction in respect of a conspiracy formed in Ireland to effect harm by means of an unlawful act or acts to be committed principally in, or against, another state, where it can be reasonably asserted that the conspiracy, if carried into effect, would be harmful, or potentially harmful, either directly or indirectly, to the interests of this State,” he said.
Source: Irish Times Read more
It’s a pity the lily-livered English and the rest of the world haven’t taken the same stance.
But, oh no, they are too busy cowering before the ‘might’ of the USA!
The USA needs to pull it’s bloody horns in.
Finally, a judicial system that won’t bow down to the terrorist state.