Mr Justice Patrick McGrath delivered judgment in the High Court on 14 March 2025 on an application made by the Minister for Justice (“the Applicant”) against Hrvoje Orsolic (“the Respondent”).
The application sought an order for the surrender of the Respondent to Croatia pursuant to a European Arrest Warrant (EAW). The warrant sought the return of the Respondent to prosecute him for two offences: (1) attack on an official, and (2) threat to personal freedom.
The Respondent lodged an objection to the EAW, asserting that the alleged offences do not correspond with Irish law. He further contended that surrender would pose a risk of an unfair trial under Article 38.1 of the Irish Constitution and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Additionally, the Respondent argued that detention in a Croatian prison would violate Articles 2 and 3 of the ECHR and would disproportionately interfere with his personal and family rights.
Section 5 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003provides that an offence specified in an EAW must constitute an offence under the law of the State. The Court was satisfied that the offences correspond with offences under Irish law, including the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997 and the Public Order Act 1994. The Court found that surrender would not disproportionately interfere with the Respondent's personal and family rights, as his affidavit does not mention having family in Ireland.
The Respondent argued that delays in the Croatian justice system could breach his right to a fair trial. The Minister noted that the Respondent had not cited any precedent where surrender to a member state was refused due to potential delays. The Court agreed with the Minister's submissions and dismissed this objection.
The Respondent argued that he would face inhuman treatment if detained in Croatia. In response, a request was sent to the Issuing Judicial Authority (IJA) in Croatia for information on prison conditions. The IJA stated that each prisoner receives personal space, medical care, access to fresh air, and that Croatian prisons adhere to European standards. The Respondent filed an affidavit sworn by a Croatian lawyer who described prison conditions as unsuitable and overcrowded.
The judgment notes concern about Croatian prison conditions, highlighted in reports from bodies such as the Committee for the Prevention of Torture. The judgment also acknowledged decisions cited by the Respondent where the European Court of Human Rights found breaches in certain Croatian prisons. However, the judgment notes that the Court must accept information from issuing authorities unless there are specific reasons to doubt the assurances.
The Court accepted the Minister's submissions that the IJA's information was sufficient to rebut concerns about the risk of the Respondent's rights being breached if detained following surrender. The High Court ordered the surrender of the Respondent to Croatia under Section 16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act.
Click here to read the judgment.