Judicial Court of Lithuania, R (on the application of) v Dumbliauskas

In deciding bail pending extradition proceedings, the court must assess whether substantial grounds exist for believing that the person would abscond and, if so, whether proposed conditions sufficiently address that risk.

The seriousness of the alleged offences, the likely sentence, alleged offending while in custody, international connections and access to assistance abroad may establish substantial grounds. Family ties, blindness, medical needs, previous compliance and restrictive conditions may be relevant, but they do not necessarily remove that risk. Where the conditions are insufficient, bail must be refused.

The Lithuanian prosecutor appealed against District Judge Purdy’s decision to grant the defendant bail pending extradition proceedings under a European Arrest Warrant. The warrant alleged a conspiracy and related plots concerning the importation of guns and ammunition into the United Kingdom.

The defendant had previously pleaded guilty in England to serious firearms offences and had served a substantial custodial sentence. The court also considered whether his previous custody affected the extradition allegations and whether his personal, family and medical circumstances reduced the risk of absconding.

1. Appeal allowed. Bail was refused.
2. The court assessed the risk of absconding in light of the seriousness of the alleged offences and the likely sentence on conviction. The allegations concerned international gun trafficking and included the possibility that the defendant had continued participating in the conspiracy while in prison.
3. The defendant’s blindness did not materially reduce the risk. His previous compliance with licence conditions was of limited significance because, before arrest, he had no apparent reason to breach them.
4. Family ties, including his wife, children and parents living in the United Kingdom, were significant considerations. They were insufficient in the circumstances to remove the substantial grounds for believing that he would abscond.
5. The proposed conditions, including residence, geographical restriction, electronic tagging, security, reporting requirements and control of travel documents, were inadequate to prevent absconding. The court therefore allowed the prosecutor’s appeal and refused bail.

• High Court (Administrative Court): Allowed the Lithuanian prosecutor’s appeal against District Judge Purdy’s decision to grant bail pending extradition proceedings. Bail was refused.