Romania extradition discharged: not proportionate to extradite where offences committed as a 14-year-old boy

The High Court has upheld the discharge of a 20-year-old Romanian man, wanted to serve a 4-year prison sentence in Romania for offences committed at the ages of 14-16.

Represented by Malcolm Hawkes, the man had been convicted of a mobile phone robbery at the age of 16. Although he was convicted, sentenced and had served a 6-month non-custodial ‘educational measure’ sentence for that offence, the Romanian authorities then prosecuted him for accessing the phone, taking photographs with it and deleting files and sentenced him to 1-year detention in an educational centre. His extradition was ordered in 2021 and he appealed.

However, during those appeal proceedings, the Romanian authorities withdrew that warrant, before reissuing it with additional offences, allegedly committed when the man was aged just 14. These included stealing an unlocked bicycle and other minor matters. He was put on trial, convicted and sentenced in absentia while he was in the UK and unable to travel to Romania to participate in his defence. He now faced a 4-year sentence in an educational centre; however, that centre can only hold detainees up to the age of 21, meaning he faced transfer into an adult prison with all the attendant concerns about overcrowding and violence in the Romanian prison estate.

In first-instance proceedings before District Judge Clews, the judge held that ‘It is not right that the Requested Person should now face being dealt with at the age of 20 for offences committed when he was 14.’ He found extradition would be oppressive and disproportionately severe; he also found clear evidence the Romanian authorities had acted with culpable delay.

In refusing permission to appeal, Ellenborgen J upheld the district judge’s discharge; it was not reasonably arguable to suggest otherwise and there was no prosecution challenge to her decision.

In Romania v Bacila, Malcolm was instructed by Katy O’Mara of ITN Solicitors.