QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
London WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
|JUDGE RADOMIR BOGUSZEWSKI REGIONAL COURT IN GDANSK POLAND||Defendant|
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
165 Fleet Street London EC4A 2DY
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7404 1424
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Ms R Scott (instructed by CPS) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
Crown Copyright ©
"The European Arrest Warrant should contain the following information set out in accordance with the form contained in the annexe:
(a) The identity and nationality of the requested person;
(b) The name address and telephone fax numbers and e-mail address of the issuing judicial authority,
(e) The description of circumstances in which the offence was committed including the time, place and degree of participation in the offence by the requesting person".
"(...) The Council Framework Decision requires the warrant to set out a description, not in legal language, of how the alleged offence is said to have occurred. In particular, the description must include when and where the offence is said to have happened and what involvement the person named in the warrant had. As with any European instrument, these requirements must be read in the light of its objectives. A balance must be struck between, in this case, the need on the one hand for an adequate description to inform the person, and on the other the object of simplifying extradition procedures. The person sought by the warrant needs to know what offence he is said to have committed and to have an idea of the nature and extent of the allegations against him in relation to that offence. The amount of detail may turn on the nature of the offence. Where dual criminality is involved, the detail must also be sufficient to enable the transposition exercise to take place."
"9. The phrase from the passage I have just quoted 'and what involvement the person named in the warrant had' might be thought to be overstating the position slightly. A person charged as a principal to a particular offence will no doubt know in this jurisdiction that he is facing an accusation involving an incident on a particular day or between particular dates, but it may be that the evidence in the possession of the prosecution may point to a number of possible conclusions as to the degree of his involvement.
10. If one takes an incident in which a number of people are involved in an attack on another in the street in which both stab wounds and blunt weapon injuries are caused, there may be differences between the witnesses as to who did what (...)."
All he is indicating there is that the precise nature of the involvement may not be needed; indeed, it is not needed. What Cranston J was intending to cover by the use of the words "what involvement the person named had" was, no doubt, what is contained in Article 8, that is to say the degree of participation and what section 2(4)(c) provides itself, namely the conduct alleged to constitute the offence.
"A. The requested person was acting in conspiracy with several others, including named individuals;
B. The conspiracy was international in nature and related to the trafficking of cannabis from the Netherlands to the United Kingdom;
C. In furtherance of the conspiracy, a consignment of cannabis weighing at least 9.5 kilos was transported from the Netherlands to the United Kingdom at the turn of the year 2008-2009;
D. A further part of the conspiracy concerned the organised money laundering proceeds of the drugs;
E. The laundered proceeds were worth at least £118,000 in total, passed in six tranches;
F. The conduct took place from the summer 2008 until the start of 2009;
G. Some of the acts in furtherance of the conspiracy took place in Poland; and
H. So far as the requested person's role is concerned, it is plain that he was one of the individuals directly involved in importation from the Netherlands to the United Kingdom, the smuggling out from the United Kingdom of the serving currency received by way of sale or proceeds. In other words, his role was not at street level, nor is he alleged to have been the head of the organisation."
"All his alleged money laundering offences were closely linked together through their recurrence. His role in the United Kingdom was to obtain the British clients from the sale of the drugs and hand it over to other collaborating subjects so as to take it to Poland for the exchange of euros, the latter then to be used to purchase marijuana in Holland in order to transmit the latter and sell it in the UK. The materials held in Poland indicate that he was fully aware of the fact that the pounds he passed onto others originated from the sale of the drugs as he was a link in the chain."