Sophie’s family is ‘shocked’ by decision not to extradite Ian Bailey

The family of the murdered Frenchwoman Sophie Toscan du Plantier criticized the decision of the High Court of Ireland not to allow the extradition of Ian Bailey, claiming that it was “not justified” and that the common law between France and Ireland “was not respected”.

In a statement issued by Jean Pierre Gazeau, Sophie du Plantier’s uncle and president of the Association for the Truth about the Assassination of Sophie Toscan du Plantier (Assoph), the family expressed “shock and dismay at the High Court decision” on Monday. past.

The High Court rejected what was a third attempt by the French authorities to have Mr. Bailey, 63, extradited with Mr. Judge Paul Burns, pointing out differences between French and Irish law in relation to crimes committed outside of their respective jurisdictions as the reason.

He said that while France bases its right to prosecute on the nationality of the victim, Ireland bases its right to prosecute on the nationality of the alleged perpetrator, meaning that despite recent changes in the law, Bailey had a “cumulative right” not to be surrendered.

Mrs Du Plantier was murdered near her holiday home near Schull in West Cork on December 23, 1996.

Ian Bailey, who is originally from England but has lived in Ireland for almost 30 years, has consistently denied any involvement in her death.

Sentenced in absentia

In May last year, a French court convicted him in absentia for his murder. Bailey and her attorney, Frank Buttimer, have repeatedly criticized the French legal actions as unjustified, calling the trial a sham.

In a statement issued this afternoon, the du Plantier family expressed their anger at the decision of the High Court of Ireland.

“The family of the victim has always respected the laws of both countries, and decisions are not always favorable for them,” he said. “Great attention was paid to respecting Irish law and compliance with the agreements of the European Treaty. To which Ireland and France adhere on equal terms.

It is not acceptable that this common unilateral legislation is not respected in this case.

“The Supreme Court was not asked to decide whether French law complied with European or Irish law. This is already accepted by the terms of the treaty signed by the 27 countries that signed the European Treaty. This one.

“The High Court of Ireland is not justified in its decision for this reason. France has the right to request the presence of a person to answer to the courts for actions contrary to French law.

All the guarantees of fair trial have already been acquired by French law in accordance with the European Treaties that bind the 27 countries. Therefore, the Irish courts can at least be expected to respect this agreement without further discussion.

“The EAW [European Arrest Warrant] request for me[an] Bailey’s presence in France is legitimate and guarantees respect and fair treatment in this case.

“France could certainly be encouraged to request, by all means, that the Irish courts respect the agreements signed on behalf of the Republic of Ireland and with respect to France, its European partner.”