Nordirlanda: il fermo di 28 giorni non viola la convenzione europea dei diritti umani

Duffy fails in court challenge

High-profile dissident republican Colin Duffy and five others, who were arrested in connection with the murder of two soldiers and a policeman, have failed to win a court declaration that the period of detention contravened human rights laws.

The suspects were seeking a verdict that provisions under anti-terrorism legislation were incompatible with their right to liberty under European legislation.

But Northern Ireland’s Lord Chief Justice, Sir Declan Morgan, and two other senior judges ruled that no basis for making the declaration had been established.

Lawyers are now set to mount a challenge to the verdict at the Supreme Court in London.

The case related to the detention of four people in connection with the Real IRA shootings of Sappers Mark Quinsey, 23, and Patrick Azimkar, 21, outside Massereene Army barracks in Antrim on March 2009.

Duffy, 43 and from Lurgan, is due to stand trial for the murders.

Two others involved in the challenge were held over the murder of Constable Stephen Carroll, 48, by the Continuity IRA in Craigavon, Co Armagh two days later.

Under the Terrorism Act 2000 the suspects were able to be detained for up to 28 days before they must be formally accused or released.

The six claimed that relevant sections of the legislation were incompatible with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

It was argued that a judge who hears applications for extended custody was not a competent judicial authority because issues of bail cannot be considered.

The Divisional Court rejected claims that the Act meant a person could be detained for up to 28 days without any consideration of the proportionality or justification for such detention.

It stated that there is a continuing need to demonstrate reasonable suspicion.

Sir Declan said: “Issues of proportionality and justification are fundamental aspects of the review process.”

Lawyers for the applicants also argued that Article 5 of the European Convention requires a detained person to be charged well before the expiry of the 28 day period. But finding against this submission, the court held that the charging of a detainee was not relevant to the duration of their detention.

Sir Declan added: “We do not consider that the appellants have established any basis for contending that paragraphs 29 or 36 of Schedule 8 to the 2000 Act are incompatible with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.”

Following the verdict a lawyer for four of those involved in the case confirmed plans to contest it.

Paul Pierce, of Kevin R Winters and Co, said: “We are going to carefully consider the judgement and it will be out intention to petition the Supreme Court so they can consider the matters further.”

The Committee on the Administration of Justice has expressed its deep disappointment at the ruling.

Mike Ritchie, CAJ’s Director said: “It is of great concern that such extended detention has not been ruled unlawful.

“It is deeply regrettable that the domestic courts feel that, with the peace process never more deeply stable, the police should have a power to detain for 28 days.”