Former brother’s bid to block extradition rejected
A High Court judge has rejected the bid by former Catholic brother Bernard Kevin McGrath to overturn the Minister of Justice’s decision to grant his extradition to Australia to face sex charges.
Justice Cameron Mander’s decision was issued at the Christchurch High Court today, two weeks after he spent a half-day hearing submissions on the judicial review of the decision by former Justice Minister Judith Collins.
Australia is seeking the extradition of McGrath , 65, to face 252 child sex abuse charges there.
Justice Mander said today: “I conclude that the Minister made no reviewable error in making her decision that Mr McGrath be surrendered to the Commonwealth of Australia. The application for review is declined.”
Defence counsel Phillip Allan argued in the hearing that there had been a breach of natural justice in the minister’s decision. He said this concerned the failure of the Ministry of Justice to obtain further information about McGrath’s circumstances and the limited support he would have available to him in Australia.
He said McGrath would have no emotional support, no financial support, and questions concerning the funding of the defence on legal aid.
The judge said in his decision that the minister had concluded that the factors relied upon did not give rise to compelling or extraordinary circumstances that would make it unjust or oppressive.
He noted allegations that Cameron Slater, a blogger associated with the minister, had breached suppression orders imposed in the case, but he described suggestions of communications about the case between Mr Slater and the minister as “unfounded speculation”.
He rejected McGrath’s complaint that the Ministry’s briefing notes for the Minister had not been referred to him for comment.
“There was no requirement for the briefing paper, which itself constitutes legal advice to the Minister, to be disclosed to Mr McGrath for his comment, nor, given the nature of the process, a requirement that he be given the opportunity to be heard on its contents,” said the judge.
Various aspects of the case remain covered by suppression orders.
Category: Focus
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Connect
Connect with us via: