The Extradition Fiasco

In recent weeks, the American Senate have had hearings relating to a proposed extradition treaty between Britain and the US. Dominic McGlinchey, extradited from the Republic eighteen months ago is appealing his conviction for murder. Two months ago, John Quinn was freed by a London court following extradition from Dublin last March. Very soon, even more controversial cases are likely to come before the courts.

The recent case of John Patrick Quinn and the apparent bungling of the British police is bound to become an issue in these hearings. This is especially so in view of the harder political line Chief Justices and Attorneys General have been taking in the last few years.

Robert Russell and Brendan Bums are currently in Portlaoise Prison. Between them, they have served three years in jail. Neither has been charged with any offence in this jurisdiction nor will they be. They are awaitting extradition to the six counties. Both have been extraadited by the District Court and both are looking for orders under Section 50 of the Extradition Act 1965, quashing their extraditions. "Political offences", or "offences conneccted with political offences", were always exempt from exxtradition until the historic Supreme Court judgement in 1982 which saw the handing over of Dominic McGlinchey to the RUe. McGlinchey is currently appealing his convicction for the murder of Hester McMullan in County Antrim in March of 1977. Part of the evidence used to convict him was his affidavit used in high court hearings in the republic. These were handed over to the RUC without the knowledge of McGlinchey or his legal advisers.

Another extraditee, Seamus Shannon was handed over to the RUC in July of last year. At a bail hearing in the High Court, Detective Inspector McGann -of the RUC in Belfast, said that the Book of Evidence against Shannon "has been prepared" and that the "authorities are in a position to proceed." Fourteen months later, the case has still not come to trial. No evidence was presented in the republic to link Shannon with the offences he was wanted in connection with - the killing of Sir Norman Stronge and his son James in County Armagh in January 1981.

Currently, an extradition treaty between Britain and the US is the subject of Senate hearings. Should the treaty be passed, it will have significan t repercussions for IRA men. claiming political asylum for offences committed against the security forces in the North. The basic requirement in American extraditions - that a prima facie case exists Hdoes not extend to the Extradition Act 1965. Absolutely no evidence need be shown to link the accused to the crime. This glaring anomaly became particularly apparent earlier this year following the extradition of John Patrick Quinn to London.

Quinn walked free from Horseferry Magistrates Court in London whim all the charges for which he had been exxtradited were dismissed. The Director of Public Prosecuutions in Britain immediately went into the high court looking for what is known as a Voluntary Bill of Indicttment. This would have allowed Quinn to be put on trial in the Old Bailey. The Bill was gran ted and detectives rushed to arrest Quinn, and alerted all air and sea ports. They were ten minutes late. Quinn was already on a plane back to Dublin and thereafter to his home in Ballina. The story of how John Quinn carne to have the charges dismissed against him paints a picture of extraordinary bungling on the part of the British police.

In November 1980, John Patrick Quinn passed off more than £10,000 in travellers' cheques. Some of the cheques were passed off in Barclay's Bank in Russell Square in Lonndon. The money was passed on to a fellow member of the INLA, to which Quinn belonged at the time, for that orgaanisation. In April 1981, Quinn's fingerprints were taken in Dublin: Two months later, the travellers' cheques that had been passed in London were sent to the Fingerprint Section in Britain for examination. In March 1982, a warrant was issued at Horseferry Magistrates Court for Quinn's extradiition. This is a routine hearing. The warrant was endorsed in Dublin and Quinn was arrested. He then went into the High Court claiming that the offence was 'political and that he was exempt from-extradition.

The Supreme Court significantly altered its interpretaation of the law. Chief Justice Finlay stated that "This court cannot, it seems to me ... grant immunity from extradiition to a person charged with an offence, the admitted purrpose of which is to facilitate the overthrow by violence of the Constitution and of the organs of state established thereby." (This was in stark can trast to what Justice Finlay had said about Fr Brendan Burns, a priest who told the court he was holding 130 sticks of gelignite fat the IRA. "It seems to me," said Justice Finlay in that case in 1974, "that the safe keeping of explosives for an organisation attempting to overthrow the state by violence is, according to that test, an offence of a political character.") But prior to Quinn's extradition, there had been other developments.

John Patrick Quinn is a fish dealer in Ballina where he lives with his wife and three children. In July 1983, Detective Constable Kevin Tooher and Detective Inspector John Barnes, both from London, turned up in Ballina to interrview Quinn. He finally flew to London on March 1 of this year, following the Supreme COUli decision, to face fraud charges relating to a sum of £600. He was interviewed by police on his arrival and thereafter transferred to Wormmwood Scrubbs prison. He was classified a high security cateegory A prisoner and spent twenty-three hours a day in soliitary confinement.

Quinn was remanded twice at Horseferry Magistrates Court in March, the prosecution claiming that the papers had not been forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecuutions. On April 4, a police officer told the court that the papers had been sent. Legal counsel for Quinn, Michael Fisher, saw a note in his hand to the effect that the "papers were to be sent." Magistrate Norma Negus ordered Detecctive Inspector Barnes to come before the court when this anomaly was pointed out. He was unable to explain away his subordinate's behaviour. In the event, a further remand for four weeks was granted.

Quinn, in the meantime, was classified as an ordinaryycategory B prisoner. In the beginning of May, Detective' Barnes asked for a further remand and still no papers had been served on the defence. The case was adjourned for twenty-four hours and the defence was served with the statements. However, there was no evidence present which would allow the prosecution to proceed with the charge.

A copy of an affidavit, purporting to be Quinn's affidaavit in the High Court in Dublin was produced. No applicaation had been made to the High Court to have this made available. Legal counsel for Quinn, Michael Fisher, immeediately took steps to ensure that the British authorities should not have access to the original affidavit without both parties being present. Quinn applied for bail and was granted it on two sureties of £2.,500 each.

Detective Barnes objected to bail on the grounds that Quinn would commit further offences and he would be unlikely to tum up for his hearing. Magistrate Norma Negus ~sponded to this argument by telling Detective Barnes "We're not in Dublin now. We're dealing with the Bail Act."

The prosecution were- accused of "acting in bad faith, abusing the process of the court and inexcusable procrasstination. Michael Fisher expressed fears at that point that Quinn would be charged with offences other than those he had been extradited to face.

One month later, the prosecution wanted the case deelayed until after a High Court hearing in Dublin, scheduled for July, in which Quinn's affidavits would be a matter for legal argument. Senior Treasury Counsel for the prosecuution, Roy Arnlot, said that the speciality rule - a rule which allows for an extradited person to be charged only with the offences for which they were extradited, would apply. He also said that this was an agreement "reached between the Irish Attorney General and the British Attorrney General." (Sources close to the government have deenied that such an "agreement" was ever reached.) All charrges were dismissed against Quinn and he returned to Ireeland.

In the weeks following his release, the London Evening Standard and the Daily Express carried unattributed stories about Quinn. The former said that Quinn "had been on the point of giving valuable information about bombings and assassinations ... and appeared to be about to turn informer. Now he has fled to Dublin and what he could have told about the INLA and its organisation will never be known ... he flew to Dublin where he is now staying at a secret address."

Quinn was living openly in Ballina and had not been interviewed by Special Branch detectives since his arrival in London. His solicitor, Michael Fisher, says that "followwing his release, Scotland Yard tried to cover up their emmbarrassment by blaming the Magistrate and alleged that he was on the point of giving information to the Special Branch about INLA activities. This was a lie and black propaganda and dangerous to Quinn." He further added that the case "was dismissed because the police lied in court, both orally and in a witness statement." He added that he "had no doubt that Quinn's case was selected by lawyers in both countries in order to change the extradiition laws without anyone realising what was happening. This squalid manouvre deserves to fail." Sources close to the government deny that there is any embarrassment over the affair and say that there are "no plans to change the law" in relation to the production of prima facie evidence in Irish courts for people wanted in the North and Britain.

Nonetheless, the case of John Patrick Quinn is bound to have a bearing on the cases now due before the courts in the Republic. The fact that the law had been altered signiificantly in the case, and then all charges dismissed,is bound to be an issue.

For three years, John Quinn had the threat of prosecuution and charge hanging over him. And then on the day, the British authorities could not apparently produce enough evidence in court to proceed with their case. The fact that the British police were taking steps to acquire Quinn's affidavit also shows that they did not have the proof reequired to proceed. This fact assumes a new importance when one considers that in the Shannon judgement last year, the Supreme Court intimated that the motive of those committing criminal acts was an important consideration in whether or not the crimes were political and thus exempt from extradition. Those wishing to claim the "political" exception from extradition, must first therefore admit to the crime.

This poses a particularly acute problem for those people who are completely innocent. Their guilt or innocence cannot be an issue in extradition proceedings as the law now stands. And in order to have even an opportunity of exempting themselves from extradition, they must incrimiinate themselves and plead guilty.

Dominic McGlinchey, Seamus Shannon and John Patrick Quinn could all have been charged in the Republic with the offences they were wanted for in the North and Britain under the Criminal Law Jurisdiction Act 1976. However, the British authorities chose not to proceed along those lines. Robert Russell is wanted by the RUC in the North for "escape from lawful custody." He was one of the thirtyyeight Maze escapees in September 1983. Russell, twentyyseven, was interned when he was sixteen. In 1976, he was arrested and charged with a killing but the charges were later dropped. In 1982, he was sentenced to twenty years for the attempted murder of Superintendent Drew in Bellfast. He was also convicted of wounding with intent, and having fi,tearms and ammunition. He was granted a. retrial but the conviction was upheld. (In 1984, another escapee, Philip McMahon was granted an order by the Supreme Court restraining his extradition.)

The second case coming before the High Court is that of Brendan Bums. He was arrested on foot of fifteen warrants from the North, five relating to the killing of five British soldiers at Camlough, County Down, in May 1981. Another warrant relates to the killing of a British soldier at Crossmaaglen in October 1982. The remaining nine warrants relate to explosions, possession and control of explosives and connspiracy. It is claimed that the offences are political and thus exempt from extradition.

What is significant about both the above cases is that no evidence need ever be produced in a court in the Republic' linking either of the men to the alleged offences. The norrmally conservative senior and junior counsel who work the high and supreme courts are now saying that the entire extradition issue was carefully engineered from the start. First, there was Dominic McGlinchey, extradited for the killing of a sixty-seven year-old woman, Hester McMullan. It later emerged that there was much more evidence linkking him with other killings than there was with Hester MeeMullan. Then came the case of Seamus Shannon, wanted for killing eighty-six year-old Sir Norman Stronge and his son James. It is felt that these were particularly "emotive" cases, not likely to benefit from the political exception from extradition. Philip McMahon's extradition was turned down. One of the reasons for this was that four of MeeMahon's co-accused had appeared in court in the Republic nine years previously, had asserted that the offence of escaping from Newry courthouse was political, and were not extradited. The latter case of John Patrick Quinn turned completely on its head the traditional assumption of a "political offence".

Senior Counsel and President of the Irish Bar Council, Paddy MacEntee, says that the case of John Patrick Quinn "presents a most disquieting set of facts" and that "it needs to be looked into all its aspects as a matter of urgency." John Patrick Quinn faced three years of high and supreme court battles without any legal aid.

Both the Irish Attorney General, John Rodgers, and his British counterpart, Michael Havers, have refused to commment"