Decision to refuse bail was lawful

Article 40 – habeas corpus – prisoner arrested in the United Kingdom on foot of a European Arrest Warrant issued in Ireland for the prosecution of two offences, namely, a drugs offence and endangerment – consented to his return to Ireland – granted bail on conditions in UK – returned to Ireland – charged with the endangerment offence – four bench warrants relating to road traffic offences that did not form part of the EAW – he objected on the basis that he had been returned to Ireland in order to be dealt with in respect of certain specified matters that were the subject of the warrant – District Court Judge ruled against him - State objected to bail on the grounds that he was a flight risk with a history of taking bench warrants and absconding to the UK – State argued that imposition of conditions would not be sufficient – he argued that he was unaware of the existence of any warrants - argued that he believed his life was in danger in Ireland - District Court refused bail – held that he would probably be in custody in the UK if he did not consent to surrender – held that if he absconded to the UK now it would cause difficulties and the State would have to issue another EAW – prisoner argued that his detention is unlawful because he was being prosecuted and detained in respect of offences which did not form the subject-matter of the European arrest warrant – argued that the District Court Judge erred in his remarks when refusing him bail - doctrine of specialty – at the hearing the State indicated that the only offences for which he would be prosecuted would be those in respect of which his surrender was sought and made - rationale which the District Judge offers for him being a flight risk is entirely convincing – if any error does arise in the District Judge’s comments, they are not sufficient to deprive him of jurisdiction – Court does not perceive there to be any error on the face of the District Court order such as would justify release.