Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)

I thank the Minister for introducing this administrative and technical Bill, which aims to facilitate the efficient processing of European extradition warrants. The creation of pan-European freedom of movement, goods and capital has, unfortunately, generated transcontinental criminal movements. The legislation aims to clear up and consolidate existing legislation and further empower the authorities to deal with the increasing number of European extradition warrants.

It is an irony of having in place a proper justice system that the criminals who often seek the system's protection use its checks and balances to delay the administration of justice. As legislators, we must seek to strike a balance between protecting the rights of all accused persons, while also ensuring that those who seek to avoid justice cannot hide behind anything of an administrative or procedural nature in our laws. The Bill, once amended in the manner outlined by the Minister, achieves this balance and, as such, the Fianna Fáil Party will support it.

The range of technology and new forms of criminality, including cybercrime, that has evolved since the introduction of the European arrest warrant system in 2003 challenge legislators to produce legislation that is sufficiently strong and effective to keep ahead of those criminal minds which seek to exploit technology for all the wrong reasons. For this reason, it is important to design our laws in a manner that retains checks and balances and produces provisions that are administratively lean enough to respond to threats we cannot yet foresee but which may form part of the criminal fraternity's armoury only 12 months from now.

It is difficult to believe that only 20 years ago Members of this House, specifically members of my party, used to drive themselves apoplectic over the issue of extradition. Those who can no longer recall those days, which does not include the Minister and Leas-Cheann Comhairle as they were Members at the time, should watch the scenes portrayed in the "Reeling in the Years" programme broadcast last Sunday night. That Deputies are discussing extradition in a relatively businesslike manner is an indication of how far relations on this island and with our neighbouring island have improved and demonstrates the overall success of the European wide extradition model. In that respect, I acknowledge and share the concerns the Minister expressed about piecemeal changes to the system.

The majority of the extradition requests received and issued by Ireland are governed by the European arrest warrant procedure. According to the European Commission, the total number of European arrest warrants issued by member states between 2005 and 2009 was 54,689. These resulted in the surrender of 11,630 suspects, giving a 21% success rate. The figures indicate that while the system is widely used, it is subject to checks and balances to ensure it is not abused. As the Minister noted, 161 persons were surrendered by the State to other member states in 2010.

I share the Minister's concerns that the review of the European arrest warrant process since 2003 has been piecemeal and welcome his commitment to undertake a review of our entire suite of extradition laws. This review should consider the administrative burden the European arrest warrant system places on the judicial and Garda authorities and ascertain whether technology can be used to reduce this burden.

The provisions outlined by the Minister, specifically those relating to sections 9 and 10, constitute a considerable tightening of practice in the European arrest warrant system. Vague aspirations on deadlines are being tightened up and strict limits are being imposed. I assume this will be accompanied by very rigorous training for everybody involved in this system, and that prior to the President signing this legislation with its amendments into law, they will be made aware of these changes. There cannot be a situation where there is an overlap between the implementation of this legislation and the very substantial changes in practice that come with it for somebody possibly evading justice.

The EAW procedure, since its inception, has considerably changed the nature of extradition within the Union. As the Minister has said, it came into place rather suddenly, following long discussion immediately in the aftermath of the events of 11 September 2001, and there has been a need for considerable changes since. There was a degree of vagueness in the EAW procedure that was, looking at it now, quite surprising in a legal document, but it was seen at the time as a necessary response to the events of that day. As with any outrage, distance means we tend to forget the horror and look at what could have been done in hindsight. Now we have a chance to do that in this review.

If we enact this Bill, it will give effect to various Council decisions which govern situations where people have been tried in their absence. This is a growing trend in criminal law. The decision is designed to enhance the procedural rights of such persons while simultaneously promoting the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions rendered in their absence. It establishes precise and consistent grounds for non-recognition by member states of decisions rendered in absentia. I also welcome the changes the Minister is bringing in regarding identification material. This Bill, if enacted, will allow the Garda to take fingerprints, palm prints and photographs, but only for the purpose of identifying a person arrested under the 1965 Act.

The key provision in the Billis the extension of the provisions of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 to third countries, when previously it had only applied to designated EU member states. If enacted, the provisions of the 2003 Act may be applied to third countries, but only where an agreement on surrender is in place between the third country and the EU, such as the agreement on the surrender procedure between EU member states and Iceland and Norway. The extent of the application to third countries will be restricted. The extension is to be welcomed as we trade and do more business. Unfortunately, legitimate trading can be accompanied by criminal activity and we must ensure our armoury is fully up to date.

I welcome the various commitments made by the Minister in respect of amendments. I think they strengthen the Bill, but he might give the House a timeframe, in what is a very productive legislative schedule in his Department, as to when he will bring in a full review of the legislation. I presume it will not happen this session and the chances of it happening in the next session are quite limited. Will the review be legislative-based, or does the Minister intend to have a public consultation on it? Any other details are welcome.

See this speech in context