Prisoner to challenge State's call on transfer

A British citizen serving two life sentences here for murder has secured leave from the High Court to challenge the State's failure to give him reasons for its refusal to transfer him to Britain to serve his sentences there.

Mark Nash (28), who lived most of his life in Leeds, was convicted in October 1998 of the murders of Mr Carl and Mrs Catherine Doyle at their home at Caran, Ballintober, Castlerea, Co Roscommon, on August 16th, 1997. Both victims died from multiple stab wounds.

In January 1999 Nash applied for a transfer to a British prison. In May 2001 he was informed his application had been refused.

At the High Court yesterday counsel for Nash was granted leave by Mr Justice Finnegan to seek orders directing the Minister for Justice, and the State to set out reasons for the rejection of Nash's transfer application.

He will also seek declarations that his right to be kept informed at regular intervals regarding the progress of his application for transfer was contravened. His right to have a decision made on his transfer application within six months was also breached, he argues.

In the statement grounding the application for leave, it is noted that Ireland is a signatory of the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (1983), which was incorporated into Irish law by the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (TOSP) Act, 1995. The convention has also been incorporated into British law.

It is asserted that Nash is eligible to apply for a transfer to a British prison. The TOSP Act states that a decision regarding an application for transfer should be made, where practicable, within six months of the date of the application. It is claimed the Minister is in breach of his statutory duty in that regard and had unduly delayed in making a decision on Nash's application.

The Act also provides, pending a decision on an application for transfer, that the applicant shall be kept informed at regular intervals of the progress of their application. Nash contends the Minister has also failed to comply with his statutory duty in that regard.

Nash said he was informed by the chief officer of Arbour Hill Prison in April 2001 that his transfer application was being refused. In May 2001 his solicitor wrote to the Minister for Justice asking him to make a decision on the application and stating that, if no reply was received within two weeks, High Court proceedings would be taken.

In an undated letter of May 2001 he was formally told his application was being refused. In another letter of May 17th, 2001, his solicitor was told the interests of justice prevented the Minister from specifying the grounds of the refusal.

In an affidavit, Nash said he had suffered mental anguish, distress and loss as a result of the alleged failures of the Minister and State. He said he would have easier access to his family if transferred to Britain.