No evidence that Romanian authorities will not observe the rule of specialty

European arrest warrant – Romanian authorities seeking the respondent’s surrender - enforce a sentence of two years and four months’ imprisonment – points of objection - offence involving driving without a driving licence - breached the terms of the suspended sentence by the commission of another offence of driving without a licence – sentence on certain conditions, including that the respondent was to engage with a probation programme – failed to do so - revoked the suspended sentence that had been imposed and did so in the absence of the respondent – warrant issued - additional information – in absentia - no doubt that the respondent was aware of the imposition of the original sentences and the subsequent suspension of same - whether the domestic Court which heard the hearing on the revocation of the suspended sentence had the “potential” power to materially alter the original sentence - nothing to suggest that the Court either had, or, indeed, in any way exercised, such “potential” power - Section 45 of the Act expressly identifies the circumstances in which a person tried in absentia may be returned, primarily where there is evidence of service, or where the person was legally represented, or where it is shown that a right of retrial in the requesting state is available - in a position to avail of a right to a re-hearing or appeal on his return to the issuing State – issue of specialty - the additional information refers to a further offence of Aggravated Theft and indicates that the respondent is sought in respect of this offence - seeks an undertaking from the issuing judicial authority that he will not be prosecuted in respect of this offence as it was not included in the European arrest warrant and the rule of specialty should apply - principle of mutual trust between Member States and the principle of mutual recognition - no evidence before the Court suggesting, much less confirming, that the issuing authority will not observe the rule of specialty, or that if the issuing judicial authority requires to proceed against the respondent in relation to that additional charge, that it will do so in violation of its obligations under the Framework Decision – surrender ordered –