A Czech man’s legal struggle against a second extradition request by authorities back in his homeland has resulted in a judgment pronouncing his discharge from police custody.

Marek Drga, 40, residing in Gozo, had been facing a second round of extradition proceedings sparked off by a European Arrest Warrant issued by Czech authorities, calling for the man’s surrender to face prosecution in his homeland for alleged tax evasion, tax fraud and complicity dating back to 2011 and 2012.

Mr Drga had already undergone extradition proceedings last year, faced sentencing abroad and had returned to Malta pending an appeal, before being targeted by a fresh request for extradition by the Czech authorities, who, defence lawyer Roberto Montalto had claimed, were “abusing the system.”

When tracing the course of events which had led to Mr Drga’s second round of extradition proceedings, the court, presided over by magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech, observed that the man had been taken into custody in the Czech Republic in February 2018 after the first round of extradition proceedings in Malta had resulted in a final judgment in January of that year.

After spending some six months in a Czech prison and while criminal proceedings in his regard were still ongoing, Mr Drga had been released from custody “under supervision by a probation officer”.

After stepping out of jail, the man had returned to Malta, while appeal proceedings were still ongoing, communicating his move in writing to his probation officer, calling probation services on the phone and confirming that he had returned to Malta “for reasons of work etc.”

Yet no European Arrest Warrant had been issued by the Czech authorities requesting Mr Drga’s return specifically on the grounds that he had fled justice, the court observed. “None was filed.”

On the basis of evidence put forward, the court ascertained that Mr Drga had “violated no conditions governing his release,” with respect to ongoing proceedings in his home country.

Turning its focus upon the second extradition request, the court said that this failed to conform to the speciality rule as enshrined in a Council Framework Directive which stated that a wanted person could not be tried for “an offence committed prior to his or her surrender other than that for which he or she was surrendered”.

This principle did not apply if the wanted person, having had the chance, did not leave the territory “within 45 days of his or her final discharge”.

In this case, there had been no ‘final discharge’ since Mr Drga’s case in the Czech Republic was still ongoing when he returned to Malta, the court said, meaning that the specialty rule remained “unfettered and unaffected”.

“When the wanted person left the Czech Republic, proceedings against him were not yet concluded and hence there had been no final discharge,” declared the court, concluding that Mr Drga’s return to his homeland was barred and thus ordering his release from police custody.

The court finally ordered that the AG and the Justice Minister be notified of the judgment.