The Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant and Surrender Procedures Between Member States of the European Union

2005 ◽  
pp. 13-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Plachta ◽  
Wouter van Ballegooij
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
European Arrest Warrant

How Much Independence is Necessary to Issue a European Arrest Warrant?

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-26
Author(s):  
Tanja Niedernhuber
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Legislative Change ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
The Moment

The competence for issuing a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is a hot topic at the moment. It has been the subject of four rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) alone in 2019. These are preceded by three more rulings on the same subject from 2016. All of these judgments addressed the same core question: was the issuing authority a “judicial authority” and independent enough to issue an EAW pursuant to Art. 6 (1) of the Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (FD-EAW)? If the answer to that question is “no”, the EAW issued by the incompetent authority is not valid. This article analyses the concept of “judicial authority” in the context of the FD-EAW and the legislative change currently discussed in Germany in the light of the requirements established by the CJEU.

Poland: Constitutional Tribunal on the Surrender of Polish Citizens under the European Arrest Warrant. Decision of 27 April 2005.

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 569-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Łazowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal

Just as some were getting ready to uncork bottles of champagne in celebration of the first anniversary of the enlargement of the European Union with ten member states, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal delivered an important judgment assessing the conformity of provisions of the Penal Procedure Code, transposing the European Arrest Warrant with the Polish Constitution. In the decision, which potentially has effects beyond the Polish legal system, the Tribunal annulled the transposing legislation (with a delay of 18 months) because it infringed Article 55(1), which states that ‘The extradition of a Polish citizen shall be prohibited’.

Grenzen der gegenseitigen Anerkennung bei der Vollstreckung eines Europäischen Haftbefehls

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karina Kopowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Judicial Authority

Individual circumstances can limit the scope of mutual recognition in surrender procedures and lead to non-execution of a European arrest warrant. The study focuses on the limits to mutual recognition, apart from standardised grounds for refusal, that result from the Framework Decision being embedded in the primary law of the European Union. Because grounds for refusal are vitally important for the protection of (Union) fundamental rights in surrender procedures, the study develops a guideline for steps to be considered by the executing judicial authority when deciding upon surrender.

Implementation of European Arrest Warrant in Croatia: A Risk for the Functioning of Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters in the eu?

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomislav Sokol
Keyword(s):  
Public Attention ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Framework Decision ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

Croatian accession to the eu included the implementation of the Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States. The way Croatia implemented the eaw Framework Decision, however, has resulted in controversies and public attention, both in Croatia and other Member States, revealing many problems within the system of judicial cooperation in criminal matters within the eu. The aim of the paper is to investigate the implementation of the eaw Framework Decision within Croatia; to determine whether the manner in which the said Member State has carried out the implementation has highlighted a risk for the functioning of judicial cooperation in criminal matters within the eu; and which legal measures should be used in order to prevent disintegration of the cooperation from happening. Several legal measures are proposed, both on the national and the European level, to prevent the risk of further undermining the system of judicial cooperation within the eu. These measures are presented within the context of several overarching legal principles like (providing clearer definition of the notion of) non-verification of double criminality and protection of legal interests of the Member States issuing the European Arrest Warrant.

scholarly journals THE FUTURE OF EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT IN LIGHT OF DECISION THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE CASE ARANYOSI AND CALDARARU

TEME ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 631
Author(s):  
Aleksandar Mićo Bošković ◽  
Tomislav Trajković ◽  
Gordana Nikolić
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Dominant Form ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Arrest Warrant

For a long time, extradition has been a dominant form of international mutual legal assistance, but in many cases it has proven to be an insufficiently efficient instrument. Having that in mind, on the territory of the European Union, a European arrest warrant has been established as an institute that should contribute to the effectiveness of combating modern crime and facilitate the surrender of persons between member states in order to effectively prevent the escape of suspects or convicted persons. Regarding this, the Article will first give a brief overview of the Council of the European Union Framework Decision, which regulates the European arrest warrant, and will analyze it in order to define the strengths and weaknesses of the task itself. The subject of research in this article is primarily devoted to the analysis of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the “Aranyosi and Caldararu” case. With this verdict, the European Court of Justice, derogates some of the key principles that order is based on and special attention is devoted to the devaluation of the principles of mutual trust and the principles of mutual recognition of judicial decisions among EU states, which the Council of the European Union considers as the cornerstone of judicial cooperation.

Wpływ Brexitu na współpracę sądową w sprawach karnych w Unii Europejskiej

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-56
Author(s):  
Anastazja Gajda
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Unique Position ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Criminal Matters

The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union is one of the main challenges for the continued functioning of the European judicial area in criminal matters. In this article, special attention will be paid to selected aspects of ensuring further judicial cooperation in criminal matters after Brexit. This primarily concerns the possibility of further participation of the United Kingdom in specific organs supporting this cooperation (Eurojust and Europol) and the the application of legal instruments implementing the principle of mutual recognition of judgments, with reference to the flagship legal instrument, i.e. the European arrest warrant. It also presents a unique position of the United Kingdom in the Area of Freedom Security and Justice EU, which that state is guaranteed under the provisions of Treaties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document