Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

It is a pity the figures in regard to appeals was not made available to us earlier. The Minister stated that of 28 appeals heard, three were upheld, which is interesting. There is no mention, other than the Minister's earlier reference, of vexatious cases. The Minister stated that people had benefited from the delay in surrender but I do not believe anybody benefits from a period in custody. The benefit may be that they were in custody in Ireland rather than in another jurisdiction. I have a problem with this section, which is the reason I supported the amendment.

There are people who might consent to their surrender and who, having considered the full consequences of their surrender, might on the steps of the aeroplane opt to avail of the right to appeal. In the past, under the watch of former Deputy and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, this House agreed to an increase in the number of High Court and Supreme Court judges to deal with the workload, thus ensuring no overdue delays in this area. I do not know whether the increased number of judges has resulted in a reduction in the backlog of cases to be heard. Were there no backlog, the courts would have no difficulty dealing quickly with the number of cases referred to by the Minister. Repetitious appeals could be dealt with more easily than appeals made on new points of law. I would prefer if the Minister would accept the amendment to ensure people have the right to a proper appeals process when they withdraw their consent in this instance.

See this speech in context