Alleged IRA member from Cork has extradition case referred to EU court over human rights

High Court Reporters

The EU Courts have been asked to decide whether the human rights of an alleged IRA man who is wanted in the UK for directing terrorism will be violated by changes to sentencing law introduced there three years ago.

Seán Walsh is wanted for prosecution in the North under the Trade and Co-operation Agreement between the EU and the UK.

Mr Walsh (57) is facing four charges: membership of the IRA, directing terrorist activities, conspiracy to direct terrorist activities and preparing to commit acts of terrorism, the latter three carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

He denies the claims.

The offences are alleged to have been committed in July 2020 in Omagh, Co Tyrone.

Mr Walsh, of Ballinlough, Douglas, Co Cork, was ordered to be surrendered to the UK authorities by the High Court in Ireland in October 2022 by Ms Justice Caroline Biggs, who also granted leave for Mr Walsh to appeal.

Mr Walsh opposed his surrender on grounds that it would violate his human rights under EU law.

Mr Walsh’s objection to extradition was based on changes to the law in the North relating to the sentencing of persons convicted of terrorism offences and the regime governing their release on licence.

Mr Walsh’s lawyers, led by Mark Lynam SC instructed by Mulholland Law solicitors, had argued that in the event of his surrender and conviction for any of the offences against him, a change in UK law meant a heavier penalty would be imposed on him than was applicable at the time of the alleged offending in July 2020.

High Court judge Ms Justice Biggs, in ordering surrender, said she was of the view that the penalties applicable had not changed and while rules relating to release on licence had changed, that did not, in her view, violate the EU Convention on Human rights.

In October of last year, the Supreme Court heard Mr Walsh would only be entitled to a maximum 33 per cent reduction to his custodial sentence, rather than the previous 50 per cent, under the UK’s new Counter Terrorism and Sentencing Act of 2021.

The more limited reduction, which is subject to later approval by the parole commissioners at the two-third point of the sentence, creates more uncertainty than what occurred under the previous regime, claim lawyers for Mr Walsh.

Chief Justice Donal O’Donnell today put a stay on Mr Walsh's Supreme Court appeal and referred the case to the CJEU.

Mr Justice O'Donnell said the CJEU would be asked to decide whether it would be a breach of Mr Walsh’s rights if the conditions of the new sentencing act involved the imposition of a “heavier penalty” on the convicted person, rather than the penalty applicable at the time of alleged offence.