Court grants application to extradite Bailey

The High Court has ruled that Ian Bailey should be extradited to France to face an inquiry into the killing of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

The journalist with an address at The Prairie, Schull, has always denied any involvement in the death of the French film producer at her holiday home in West Cork in December 1996.

Mr Bailey, who was with his partner Jules Thomas, showed no reaction as the High Court ordered his surrender to the French authorities.

No charges have ever been brought against the former journalist in connection with the violent killing of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

When no criminal charges were brought in Ireland, officials in Paris appointed Patrick Gachon, an investigating magistrate, to re-examine the case.

Under French law, authorities can investigate the suspicious death of a citizen abroad but they cannot compel witnesses to go to Paris for questioning and issued a European arrest warrant for Bailey.

His barrister argued it was unlawful to extradite Mr Bailey without a charge preferred against him, “just..as it were… to ask him some questions”.

However, Mr Justice Michael Peart today found there is a presumption that the rights of an accused person are upheld under French law.

He has ordered Mr Bailey surrender but has put a stay on his extradition until next Tuesday so that an appeal may be lodged.

Recent law graduate Bailey still lives in Schull with his partner Ms Thomas, who has remained by his side over the years.

As he handed out a lengthy 54-page judgment to the court, Mr Justice Michael Peart ordered a stay on Bailey's extradition until Tuesday - giving his legal team time to decide if they want to appeal against his decision to Ireland's Supreme Court.

Barristers for Bailey had argued there was no new evidence against his client and the process was an abuse of powers.

But the judge ruled there was no evidence that Bailey faces a real risk of an unfair trial in France.

“This court must, and does, presume the rights of accused persons are protected under French law to the standard required under the Convention (European Convention on Human Rights),” said Mr Justice Peart.

“That presumption underpins the arrangements for surrender between member states under the framework decision, and has not been displaced by the evidence adduced on this application.”

The warrant was issued in February 2010 and executed in Dublin on April 23 last year.

Bailey’s legal team argued the application was contrary to the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 and that he could not be extradited for the purpose of an investigation only.

However Mr Justice Peart said the warrant clearly stated that its purpose was so the respondent can be prosecuted for the offence.

“It is nowhere stated that its purpose is simply for the investigation of the offence,” he continued.

Elsewhere Mr Justice Peart said a decision by the DPP in Ireland not to prosecute was immaterial.

“The investigating judge in Paris has come to the view that there is sufficient evidence for the purpose of putting the respondent into the next phase of the prosecution procedure, and that before the matter can proceed further his attendance before the investigating magistrate is required under this Article,” he added.

“This is what is sought to be achieved by having the respondent surrendered.

“This procedure is clearly one which occurs within the process of prosecuting the respondent under French law.”

As Bailey left Dublin’s Four Courts, solicitor Frank Buttimer said they needed time to analyse the detailed judgment and consider the implications.

“We will also have to appear before the High Court on Tuesday so it would be inappropriate to comment on any other matter concerning the judgment,” he added.

Bailey recently spoke of the trauma of being implicated in the murder case.

“Events surrounding the arrest have caused me great personal damage and distress,” he said in an affidavit.

“I was unable to live a normal life in the way I’d otherwise have done.”