The Gazette 1989

GAZETTE

MARCH 1989

formal", 20 there are, it is sub- mitted, four substantial points it can consider: arrest, the docu- ments supporting the request, correspondence of offences and identity. Arrest A person is brought before the District Court, under Part III, pursuant to an endorsed warrant. 1 The Court, under this Part, is not entitled to consider any defence under section 50 and "the substantial hearing on the merits (if there is to be one) takes place for the first time in the High Court". 2 The proofs are: 1. The validity of the warrant and associated documen- tation. 2. That the person who has been arrested is, in fact, the person named or described in the warrant. 3. That the offence described in the warrant corresponds with any offence under the law of the State which is an indictable offence or if punishable, on summary conviction, by imprisonment Dunne -v- Clinton 9 imposes on Justices a duty to discharge a prisoner arrested improperly in the ordinary course of events, for example without reasonable suspicion or for questioning. It surely follows that a District Justice in an extradition case can enquire, if the defence raise the point and establish evidence to ground it, into a deliberate and conscious violation of the accused's constitutional right to liberty. As a matter of practice, this does happen in the District Court. On 22 March 1986, for example, Evelyne Gienhoimes was released by District Justice Conellan because the documents supporting the warrant for her arrest were defective. A telephone call was Advertising and Promoting your Practice? Don't let it be a case of "CAVEAT EMPTOR" ADVERTISING AND MARKETING A NEW ERA FOR SOLICITORS. HOW WILL YOUR FIRM FACE THIS EXCITING CHALLENGE DON'T LOSE OUT TO YOUR COMPETITORS. THE PRODUCTION PARTNERSHIP SPEC IAL I SE IN DESIGN AND PRINT WORK. WE CAN PRODUCE YOUR CORPORATE BROCHURE. ANNUAL REPORT. BOOKLETS AND NEWSLETTERS. WE HAVE THE RESOURCES TO ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS ON PROMOTING YOUR SERVICES. WE CAN TAKE A BRIEF FROM INITIAL CONCEPT THROUGH TO PRINTED MATERIAL. EXPERT ADVICE IS ONLY A CALL AWAY. TALK TO JIM TOBIN OR BILL BOLTON NOW. p r o d u c t \ o n for a maximum period of at least six months. 3 It was possibly never intended that the District Justice should consider the validity of the accused's detantion. The accused was to be informed of his right to challenge the legality of his detention in the High Court either by Habeas Corpus proceedings or by raising defences under section 50. 4 In 1965 a challenge to the legality of his detention would have been a less complex and fruitful matter than today, as the duty to ensure that the Executive did not obtain the planned results of a deliberate and conscious violation of a citizen's constitutional rights received its first mention in the Irish Reports of that year 6 and the full effect of that principle was realised only in 1977.» Thus in 1985 when Robert Trimbole was arrested under section 30 of the Offences Against the State Act 1939, on a pretence of the possession of a firearm 7 and, on being discharged by the High Court, was rearrested for extradition under Part II, it was hardly foreseeable from a 1965 perspective that the entire procedure, as a product of the initial illegal arrest, would be struck down by the High and Supreme Court as a violation of his right to personal liberty. Indeed the entire legal climate has changed and Habeas Corpus is now regarded "as a remedy for unfair procedures and not as a substitute for fair procedures". 8

p a r t w e r s / z i p CORPORATE • MARKETING & ADVERTISING PRODUCTION T H E P R O D U C T I O N P A R T N E R S H IP L I M I T E D 4 I UPPER M O U N T STREET. DUB L IN 2, I RE LAND TEL: ( 0 1 ) 6 I 8 8 5 S (4 L I NES ). FAX: ( 0 1) 6 I 8 0 8 3

119