Way cleared for extradition of woman who absconded while on trial in London

Farah Damji was convicted of breaching a restraining order but claimed she would not receive the mental health support she requires in British prison

Farah Damji was not present in court on Wednesday although the court was told that her lawyers had been made aware of the State’s intention to seek to lift the stay. File photograph: Collins Courts
Farah Damji was not present in court on Wednesday although the court was told that her lawyers had been made aware of the State’s intention to seek to lift the stay. File photograph: Collins Courts

The High Court has cleared the way for the extradition of woman who is wanted in the UK to serve out the remainder of her prison sentence for stalking and breaching a restraining order. On Thursday Ms Justice Eileen Robert lifted a stay on an order for the surrender of 55-year-old Ugandan-born Farah Damji following the Court of Appeal’s rejection of her challenge against the lawfulness of her detention in the State.

The Court of Appeal (CoA) on Wednesday upheld the High Court’s decision to dismiss her claim which was brought by way of an inquiry under Article 40 of the Irish Constitution.

The application to lift the stay, which had been put in place after she had sought the inquiry into the lawfulness of her detention, was made on behalf of Lalita Pillay BL for the State for the State and was not opposed by Damji.

She was not present in court although the court was told that her lawyers had been made aware of the State’s intention to seek to lift the stay.

READ SOME MORE

The order was made after what has been a lengthy legal battle by Damji before the Irish Courts in respect of the surrender request.

She had been remanded in custody after the Supreme Court, in a judgement issued last June, upheld an earlier High Court decision to order her surrender to the UK.

The British-raised Damji, who has several fraud convictions in a number of jurisdictions, had claimed she should not be surrendered due to inadequacies of the UK prison system’s mental health services that would have an impact on her fundamental rights.

Last month she was arrested by members of An Garda Síochána’s extradition unit at a property outside Ballinasloe, Co Galway before being brought before the High Court.

She had been on bail while her appeal was being considered. However, a bench warrant seeking her arrest was issued after she breached the terms of her bail.

It was claimed that in breach of one of the terms of her bail she had failed to appear before the Supreme or High Court when they were considering her case.

Previously the Courts had heard that Damji came to Ireland having absconded during her trial in London in February 2020.

She was convicted in her absence by a London Court of twice breaching a restraining order in April and June 2018 and was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.

She was arrested in Dublin in August 2020 and detained in custody in this State for seven months, before being granted bail.

Damji, who was living at an address in Dublin, also has a criminal record for fraud and theft reaching back to the 1990s.

Giving the Supreme Court’s decision, which was reached unanimously by the five judges who considered the appeal, Mr Justice John MacMenamin said there was no basis for concluding the High Court judge erred in his findings that led to him ordering Damji’s extradition.

Damji submitted that she has significant psychological vulnerabilities because of a history of experiencing abuse as a child and an adult, along with other traumatic events.

She contended that her condition would likely deteriorate further if she was obliged to serve the balance of her sentence, expected to be relatively short, in the UK.

Any order for her surrender to the UK would contravene her rights under the 2003 European Arrest Warrant Act which prohibits such orders from being made in situations where they would be incompatible with the State’s obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights or the Constitution, she also claimed.

However, the Supreme Court found the evidence did not establish that Damji would be denied reasonable and required treatment while serving the short remainder of her sentence.