
Crew hired for ship with largest cocaine seizure were under ‘financial pressure'
The Special Criminal Court in Dublin heard the circumstances of how the men became involved in the massive drug trafficking operation on the MV Matthew, which was found to be carrying more than 2.2 tonnes of cocaine in September 2023.
Eight men admitted their roles in trying to smuggle cocaine worth over 157 million euros (£132 million).
The ship was intercepted and seized following a massive joint Defence Forces, garda and customs operation.
The Irish Army Ranger Wing has been praised in court for putting their lives at risk when they boarded the vessel in severe weather conditions while the crew attempted to steer the ship to high seas.
Six of the men arrested on board the MV Matthew had ignored repeated warnings from the LE William Butler Yeats naval vessel.
Two other men were rescued from a boat that was bought in Castletownbere, which had been purchased to collect drugs from the main vessel.
Ukrainians Mykhailo Gavryk and Vitaliy Vlasoi, both 32; Iranians Soheil Jelveh and Saeid Hassani, 39; Filipino Harold Estoesta, 31, and Dutch national Cumali Ozgen, 49, all pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine for sale or supply on board the MV Mathew between 24 and 26 September 2023.
Ukrainian national Vitaliy Lapa, aged 62, with an address at Rudenka, Repina Str in Berdyansk, pleaded guilty to attempting to possess cocaine for sale or supply between 21 and 25 September 2023.
Jamie Harbron, aged 31, of South Avenue, Billingham in the UK, also pleaded guilty that on a date between September 21 and September 25, 2023, both dates inclusive, he attempted to have cocaine in his possession for the purpose of sale or supply, an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
Colman Cody SC, counsel for Lapa, told the sentence hearing that his client was not aware of the full scale of the operation and did not have full knowledge of the operation or the structures of the criminal organisation.
The married father-of-two was told he would be paid 5,000 euros for his involvement in the operation.
Lapa had been in the merchant navy and had previously worked on fishing boats. He had recently retired and was a pensioner in Ukraine.
Detective Superintendent Keith Halley agreed that Lapa was at the lower end of the structure.
Estoesta was the second officer on board the vessel, who said he had met some of the crew in Venezuela.
The court heard how some members of the hired crew were distracted at night while those from the criminal enterprise had loaded some of the cargo containing drugs on to the vessel.
They claimed that they had been entertained with alcohol while the so-called spare parts were being transferred on to the ship.
Estoesta admitted he was concerned it was more than spare parts, as he saw armed men on the other ship, which was offloading the large cargo.
He said he didn't argue as he was terrified and was alone in the ocean. He thought the cargo may have contained contraband, like weapons or cigarettes.
His barrister, Michael Hourigan, said that he had a genuine fear of the consequences if he did not follow orders.
Vlasoi, a 33-year-old sailor, became involved in the operation after he was contacted when he posted his sailing credentials online.
The court heard that he is married with a five-year-old child, who is now living in Ireland with the accused's mother.
Paul O'Higgins SC for Vlasoi told the court that his client's 'realisation' of the situation came too late when he discovered that the enterprise was being run at a higher level by people not on the ship.
He told gardai that there were outside forces in control.
He was told he would be paid 5,000 euros for his part in the operation. Mr O'Higgins said that his client found himself in a vulnerable financial position as he tried to provide for his family during the war in Ukraine.
Hassani, a third officer on board the vessel, qualified from maritime college in 2009 and had been at sea constantly for over a decade.
Mark Lyam SC, for the 40-year-old, told the court he is married with a six-year-old daughter, and that he had financial responsibility to provide for his family, including medical care.
Mr Lyam said he succumbed to temptation because of that financial pressure and wanting to spend more time with his family.
The court was also told that he sent a text to someone in Dubai thanking them for the opportunity.
Hassani, who was airlifted from the boat, was described as being the lowest rank in terms of officers.
Meanwhile, Michael O'Higgins SC, counsel for Harbron, described his client as a drug abuser who was 'induced' into the operation to clear a drug debt.
Described as being a last-minute entry into the enterprise, he was offered a 10,000 euro reduction on his drug debt of 20,000 euros.
From Scotland, the court heard how Harbron, who was on board the second ship, the Castlemor, had no sailing experience, was not able to operate the radio and was not able to locate the life vest on board.
Mr O'Higgins said he had no role in organising, financing or giving directions.
Harbron suspected the cargo on board the larger vessel was drugs, but he said he was shocked when he saw the size of it.
Brendan Grehan SC, counsel for Dutch national Ozgen, admitted to having loaded three crates of drugs onto the vessel and also played a part in trying to burn drugs by getting paint thinners.
He said he expected to earn a bonus of between 50,000 euros and 100,000 euros.
Mr Grehan said that Ozgen, who had no sailing experience, has a son with a serious health issue following an operation on a brain tumour.
'It was partly the attraction in terms of getting involved in that he would get money to help (his son) out,' Mr Grehan added.
He told the court that his client was involved in a misguided attempt to get money for his family.
Keivon Sotoodeh, junior counsel for Jelveh, told the court that his client is a 51-year-old with two adult children.
Mr Sotoodeh said Jelveh was simply following orders and accepts he got himself involved in this, however, he 'wasn't at the top of the food chain'.
The matter has been put back to July 4.
The men have been remanded on the same terms and conditions.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
NATO allies agree huge spending boost as US demands they are 'ready' for Russia
US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth demanded GDP members of NATO be 'combat-ready' or risk losing US support amid escalating security concerns over Russia's aggression NATO allies will increase defence spending to five per cent of GDP, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has said. The American also demanded that members of the organisation be 'combat-ready' or risk losing US support amid escalating security concerns over Russia 's aggression. Speaking ahead of a NATO defence ministers meeting in Brussels yesterday, Hegseth emphasised that the alliance must move beyond symbolic gestures. He said: 'The commitment is there. Five per cent on defence spending. When you consider the threats that we face, the urgency in the world, it's critical. We don't need more flags. We need more fighting formations. We don't need more conferences. We need more capabilities. Hard power.' The call for a sharp increase from the current NATO guideline of two per cent has gained support across Europe and Canada, but places pressure on countries like the UK. The government currently spends around two per cent of GDP on defence but faces growing demands to raise that figure to at least three per cent, or even 3.5 per cent, to maintain good relations with Washington. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has promised to raise spending to three per cent when economic conditions allow, though no timeline has been set. Dutch Prime Minister and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte echoed Hegseth's urgency. 'The expectation is that on the European side of NATO and the Canadian side of NATO, if we think that we can keep ourselves safe sticking with the two per cent, forget it,' he said. 'Yes, the next three to five years, but then we are in great difficulty. And the US rightly expects us to spend much more to defend ourselves with their help, but also to equalise, which is only fair with what the US is spending on defence.' Rutte also highlighted the financial challenge. He added: 'All these investments have to be financed.' NATO ministers were set to approve 'capability targets' - detailed goals for each of the 32 member nations to purchase priority weapons and equipment, including air defence systems, long-range missiles, artillery, drones, and strategic enablers like air-to-air refuelling and heavy transport. Each nation's plan remains classified. The targets stem from a 2023 NATO blueprint aimed at countering threats from Russia or other major adversaries. NATO plans to maintain up to 300,000 troops ready to deploy to the alliance's eastern flank within 30 days, though experts doubt the allies can yet muster such forces effectively. The member countries are assigned defensive roles across three zones: the Arctic and North Atlantic, central Europe north of the Alps, and southern Europe. The timeline to meet these capability targets is within five to ten years - a timeframe NATO believes necessary given Russia's ongoing military build-up, which could accelerate if Western sanctions ease or a peace deal ends the war in Ukraine. 'We are going to gather here again and say 'okay, we failed a bit,' and then maybe we start learning Russian?' Lithuanian Defence Minister Dovilė Šakalienė warned, highlighting fears of a premature Russian strike on NATO territory. Swedish Defence Minister Pål Jonson stressed the importance of the current moment: 'We also know that after an armistice or a peace agreement, of course, Russia is going to allocate more forces closer to our vicinity. Therefore, it's extremely important that the alliance use these couple of years now when Russia is still limited by its force posture in and around Ukraine.' The Netherlands, for example, is planning to increase defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP. Dutch Defence Minister Ruben Brekelmans said the country expects to purchase more tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and long-range missile systems such as the US-made Patriot missiles capable of targeting aircraft, cruise missiles, and short-range ballistic missiles. The UK currently spends 2.3 per cent of GDP on defence and has committed to raising this to 2.5 per cent by 2027. The government has set an ambition to then increase it to three per cent by 2034. The Office for Budget Responsibility has estimated that reaching three per cent of GDP by 2030 would cost the UK government an additional £17.3 billion. In the 2024/25 financial year, the UK spent £56.9 billion on defence, increasing to £59.8 billion in 2025/26 According to 2024 figures, Poland was the top military spender as a share of its economy for the second year running. It's forecast to spend 4.1 per cent of the gross domestic product (GDP) - the total value of goods and services produced. Estonia was in second place at 3.4 per cent with the US in third place at 3.4 per cent, which is about the same level as it has been spending for the last decade. The UK came ninth on the list with 2.3 per cent. The average for NATO members in Europe and Canada is estimated at 2.0 per cent. If the UK were to pay five per cent of its GDP to NATO, taxpayers would be hit with a £128 billion bill.


New Statesman
3 hours ago
- New Statesman
Europe's far-right paradox
Photo by Diego Radames/Anadolu via Getty Images A toxic dynamic centred on refugee policy is creating political instability across much of Europe. As established mainstream parties struggle to figure out how best to deal with the far right, they are succumbing to pressure to get tougher on asylum seekers and thus mainstreaming and normalising far-right rhetoric and policy. But whether they exclude those movements from government or seek to cooperate with them, it is becoming increasingly difficult to form stable governments in Europe. On 3 June, the Dutch government collapsed when Geert Wilders withdrew his far-right Freedom Party (PVV) from the four-party coalition just over a year after it was formed. After the election in November 2023 in which the PVV emerged as the biggest party in the Dutch parliament, it took six months to form a government that included the centre-right People's Party (VVD) and was led by Dick Schoof, a career civil servant. New elections will now be held, though the date has not yet been set. After the 2023 election, Wilders had promised 'the toughest asylum policy ever' and made sure that his party controlled the asylum ministry so that it could implement his radical ten-point plan. This included deploying the army at Dutch borders, turning away all new asylum seekers, deporting Syrians whose claims were already being processed, and rejecting EU quotas. But on 3 June, he declared that the new government had not gone far enough or quickly enough and pulled out. In the Netherlands, mainstream parties have long cooperated with the far right. As far back as 2010, the then-VVD leader Mark Rutte led a minority government that had a confidence-and-supply agreement with the PVV. This week's events illustrate the fragility of that approach. Wilders hopes his party will do even better in the new elections and that he will be able to become prime minister himself. Centrists, meanwhile, hope his move will backfire and that voters will punish him for his unreasonableness. In Germany, meanwhile, where the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) became the second biggest party in the Bundestag after the election that took place in February, the mainstream parties have taken a different approach. Cooperation with the far right is much more of a taboo in Germany than in the Netherlands – there is a consensus around the idea that what are often called 'democratic forces' must maintain a Brandmauer, or firewall, to keep the far right away from power. The new chancellor Friedrich Merz has actually gone quite far in cooperating with them, by German standards at least. During the election campaign last year, he cooperated with the AfD to push an 'influx limitation bill' through the Bundestag. But as controversial as this was – it alienated the Social Democrats (SPD), with whom Merz knew he would likely have to cooperate after the election – it falls a long way short of what has happened in the Netherlands. It remains politically impossible for Germany's Christian Democrats to form a minority government dependent on AfD votes as Rutte did, let alone actually form a coalition with it. This meant that, after the election, Merz's only option was to form a grand coalition with the Social Democrats. (Some right-wing Christian Democrats, such as the historian Andreas Rödder, are beginning to argue that they need to break the taboo on cooperation with the AfD if only to give themselves other options and thus increase their power in negotiations with the SPD.) Yet despite this different approach, the political situation in Germany is now remarkably similar to that in the Netherlands. Like Wilders, Merz ran on a promise to get even tougher on asylum seekers – he promised a 'de-facto entry ban' that would have violated EU law. For all the obsessive focus on maintaining the Brandmauer, the boundaries between the centrists and the far right on refugee policy have long been blurred – in fact Wilders argues that Germany is already doing much of what he wants to do. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe However, while Merz and the Social Democrats had settled on a compromise on asylum policy – the coalition agreement promised a 'deportation offensive' but Merz was forced to dilute his promise of an entry ban – it could yet unravel. This week, a Berlin court ruled that it was unlawful for German border guards to push back three Somalis who had crossed the border from Poland and sought to claim asylum in Germany. In response, Merz seemed to suggest that he might be prepared to ignore the ruling. In doing so, Merz is threatening to abandon the compromise he reached with the SPD and, with an eye on the AfD, reverting to the approach he took during the election campaign. The Social Democrats, who have themselves moved to the right on refugee policy but stopped short of rejecting German court rulings and EU law, have insisted that the government must adhere to the rule of law – after all, this, Germany's 'democratic forces' have always insisted, is what differentiates them from 'populist' parties like the AfD. It is unlikely that the coalition will collapse over this issue. But that is itself largely because the Christian Democrats and SPD fear that if there were new elections, as there will now be in the Netherlands, the AfD would do even better than it did in February. The problem, not just in Germany but also elsewhere in Europe, is that incoherent coalitions of centrist parties formed only to keep the far right out of power also tend to strengthen the far right. [See also: Labour's muddled message] Related


ITV News
15 hours ago
- ITV News
Trump's envoy for Ukraine tells ITV News the US will not walk away from the country
'I think that would keep going on': Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg says the US doesn't plan to cut off Ukraine militarily Words by ITV News US Correspondent Dan Rivers and Washington News Editor Jonathan Wald President Trump's envoy for Ukraine, General Keith Kellogg, has told ITV News Ukraine's attack on Russian bombers was 'audacious' and 'provocative', but America is not going to abandon the country if negotiations stall. 'I think the pipeline is there to allow stuff to still come in, and the intelligence support is there. I think that would keep going on," he said. General Kellogg confirmed no one in the administration knew about the plans to strike Russian strategic bombers ahead of the attack, adding: 'I'm sure President Trump would have picked up the phone and said, I don't know if you want to go there. You don't want to do that." He also confirmed that President Trump described the attack as 'strong' and 'badass'. General Kellogg denied that Ukraine's attack, codenamed Operation Spiderweb, has damaged the ongoing peace negotiations, saying 'it kind of advances where you want to get to, which is conflict resolution.' He added: 'It shows…the Ukrainians are willing to raise the risk profile and they're also willing to do something that is kind of unusual. And going after the bombers is pretty significant.' 'You've got to give him credit for what was a fairly audacious move.' President Trump has previously dismissed the possibility of Ukraine joining Nato, while the war is currently being waged. "Nato," Trump said in February, "you can forget about. I think that's probably the reason the whole war started." Today, General Kellogg said admitting Ukraine into Nato might be an option, if Putin reneges on any deal that is brokered by America. 'If you don't fulfil the agreement, then we ought to talk about immediately bringing Ukraine into Nato, immediately vote on it. It takes 32 out of 32 to do that…So I think you've got to give the carrot and the stick and say, okay, what's the carrot?' General Kellogg was in the Oval Office when President Trump spoke yesterday to President Putin. He said his years of studying Putin had indicated to him the Russian leader would not use a tactical nuclear weapon on Ukraine, saying, 'I think he made a comment, that's not where he's going to go'. But General Kellogg added a note of caution, warning: 'There's a thing called an escalation ladder, and you're clearly on an escalation ladder. The question is, how do you get off it? And so you start to go up the ladder. "And I always have said in the national security space, make sure once you get on that ladder, you know what rung you're going to get off on and figure, okay, if you reach a point, where do you move to? "How do you and how do you do that? And that's absolutely critical for his advisors to tell him that.' He also echoed Secretary of State Marco Rubio's recent comments that the US is 'now walking away, from 'walking away'' from Ukraine. 'You know, being with the president yesterday. I don't know if you follow American hockey, ice hockey, but in American ice hockey, if two players get into a fight, they, what they call 'drop gloves', the referee will wait till one of them goes down to the ice before he intervenes, and then they intervene. "And, you know, part of that may be saying, okay, when you guys get tired of killing each other, give us a call. You've got my phone number, and we'll come and we'll try to figure it out. And maybe walking away is telling them, you guys keep knocking yourself around, and sooner or later you're going to get tired of doing that, and then we'll be around.' He also made it clear that some countries in Europe have not met their Nato defence spending commitments - made at a summit 11 years ago in Wales - agreeing some nations have been getting a free ride. 'I think there are countries there that have not met what they agreed to in the Wales Declaration that everybody signed up to," he said. "And I think, like, for example, I think Chancellor Merz is in the White House today. And I think when you went back to Angela Merkel when she was chancellor, they didn't meet the 2% at all. Even though she signed it, she signed the Wales Declaration, they kind of walked away from it. So when you say free rides, you know, they weren't owning up to the obligations that they all agreed to.' He did however have praise for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, saying: 'I think your prime minister has been very, very out front and everything in saying what he wants to do. And I think it sends a very strong and a good message. "I think the fact is that keeping the Europeans tight together is very, very important. What the Europe we see here from the United States today is significantly different than what we saw four years ago. You know, it was a fairly fragmented Europe, and now the Europeans seem to be pretty good, in lockstep with each other. And I think your prime minister sets the tone for that as well. "And, you know, today we have Chancellor Merz, the German chancellor at the White House, and I think that is going to be echoed that the Europeans are basically in lockstep, working together. And I think that's very important.' Although talks have made little progress so far, the very act of getting Ukrainian and Russian officials around a table is notable. Kellogg thinks that if anyone can close the gap between the two sides, it is President Trump. 'I tell you, I would never, ever bet against Donald J Trump. Never. That's one thing I've learned from being with him is, you know, he'll figure a way to do it. He'll bring it to a close. He's the ultimate closer.'