Colm Burke (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister to the House. I also welcome this legislation because it is important that we provide support to the system, not only in our own jurisdiction but in other jurisdictions where offences have been committed and where there is clear evidence of same. The Minister gave a very comprehensive overview of the Bill this evening. We received 284 warrant requests last year and sought 71 warrants ourselves. At a time when people can travel so freely, it is important that where someone has committed an offence, procedures are in place to ensure that he or she cannot escape by crossing the border into another country, particularly as borders have virtually been abolished within the European Union. One can now travel from the Dingle Peninsula to the border with Russia without any restrictions. Therefore, if we have that freedom, there must also be checks and balances to ensure co-operation among member states, which is what this legislation is about. The legislation provides those checks and balances and ensures that proper procedures are followed by the country seeking the transfer of an individual as well as the country that is asked to execute the warrant and see that the individual is brought to account for any offence he or she may have committed.

While the High Court has primary responsibility for dealing with European arrest warrant cases, there is a right of appeal to the Supreme Court. This concerns me, given the volume of work that is required in these cases. The Court of Criminal Appeal deals with criminal appeals but the Supreme Court currently deals with appeals in civil, commercial and family law cases. The volume of appeals going to the Supreme Court is already enormous. Under the legislation before us, the Supreme Court is the ultimate court of appeal in these matters. This issue must be dealt with. Recently, a colleague told me about a person who was waiting quite a while for a family law matter to come up for hearing in the Supreme Court. The court eventually dealt with the matter but reserved judgment on costs, and 12 months later, the issue of costs has still not been decided. This gives us an idea of the extent of the delays. It is not that the Supreme Court wants to avoid dealing with the matter but rather that it has not done so because of the volume of work it is dealing with. The Minister made reference in his speech to the number of European arrest warrant cases being dealt with at present and it is clear that quite a number of such cases will end up before the Supreme Court, which is a cause for concern. However, on a general level, I believe the legislation is the correct way forward.

The Minister stated that this is just one step in the process of bringing forward more comprehensive legislation. This legislation is important in assisting us when we seek co-operation from other countries in bringing people to trial for offences committed here and also when other countries seek our assistance. The Minister has incorporated the necessary checks and balances into the Bill.

I disagree with the last speaker, as we have seen clear evidence that where our courts are not satisfied that all proper procedures have been followed, they will not issue the appropriate order. The Minister referred to a case in which amending legislation was enacted but the court decided it would not follow through because the matter had already been dealt with. All of the necessary checks and balances are in this legislation and it is correct that we go forward with it. However, we must deal with the issue of European arrest warrant appeals from the High Court to the Supreme Court to determine whether they can be dealt with in a different manner from other appeals. I note that the current Chief Justice has raised the possibility of establishing a court of appeal before cases are sent to the Supreme Court so that only matters of real importance end up in the highest court. I am not sure whether that could be done in this case. It probably cannot, but the issue must be examined because of the volume of work the Supreme Court is required to do. I ask that this matter be taken into account in the drafting of legislation in future.