Normative and Accessory Grounds for the Non-Execution of the European Arrest Warrant
Keywords:
European Arrest Warrant, Extradition, Principle of Mutual Trust, Principle of Mutual Recognition, the European Court of Justice.Abstract
The Tampere European Council supported the initiative on abolition formal, complex extradition procedure among the Member States of the European Union and replacement it by the simplified surrender procedure, which would be based on the principle of mutual trust and principle of mutual recognition of criminal decisions. For this purpose, the Council of the European Union adopted framework decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, in 2002. Quasi-European extradition system has substantially changed surrender procedures between the EU member states, abolished restrictions regarding political offences, military offences, extradition of national, established extradition period and etc. Currently surrender procedures among the member states of the EU are carried out on the basis of the European arrest warrant. It t is a judicial decision issued by a Member State with a view to the arrest and surrender by another Member State of a requested person, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order. However, abolishment of restrictions in this areas is not absolute, the European arrest warrant should not be executed in some cases.
The article considers normative and accessory grounds for the non-execution of the European arrest warrant. Discussion on normative grounds based on the framework decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States. The consideration of accessory conditions relies on relevant practice of the European Court of Justice, which is developed within the framework of preliminary ruling procedure. The article also considers the essence and characteristics of the Quasi-European extradition system, the principles of mutual trust and mutual recognition and elements, which are integral part of the Quasi-European extradition system.References
Mirianashvili G., The Scope of Cooperation on the Criminal Matters among the Member States of the European Union and the Courts of Georgia according to the Association Agreement, the Georgian-German Criminal Magazine, N2, 2017, 40-44, http://www.dgstz.de/storage/documents/g07F05Bl¬iIKewi¬UBDB-ntciLjv¬3rObm359YmWuTVF.pdf, [18.12.2017].
Mirianashvili G., European Union Law Guide, 2015.
Alegre S./Leaf M., Mutual Recognition in Europe Judicial Cooperation -- a Step Too Far Too Soon? Case study: The European Arrest Warrant, European Law Journal: Review of European Law in Context, 2004, 200-217.
Amicis G., Initial Views of the Court of Justice on the European Arrest Warrant: Towards a Uniform Pan-European Interpretation? European Criminal Law review, 2012, 47-60.
Blekxtoon R., Ballegooij W., Handbook on the European Arrest Warrant, 2004.
Chaves M., The Evolution of European Union Criminal Law [1957-2012], 2012.
Borgers M. J., Mutual recognition and the European Court of Justice, European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminology, 2010, 01-11, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1593463, [18.12.2017].
Cambien N., Mutual Recognition and Mutual Trust in the Internal Market, European Papers, Vol. 2, 2017, No 1, 93-115.
Emaus J., The Interaction Between Mutual Trust, Mutual Recognition and Fundamental Rights in Private International Law in Relation to the EU’s Aspirations Relating to Contractual Relations, European Papers, Vol. 2, 2017, No 1, 117-140.
Fichera M., The Implementation of the European Arrest Warrant in the European Union: Law, Policy and Practice, 2009.
Kaczorowska A., European Union Law, 2nd ed., 2011.
Larsen L. B., ‘Some Reflections on Mutual Recognition in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice‘, in: Cardonnel, Pascal, Rosas, Allan, Wahl, Nils, (eds.), Constitutionalising the EU Judicial System: Essays in Honour of Pernilla Lindh (Oxford: Hart Publishing) 2012, 148.
Marin L., “Only You”: The Emergence of a Temperate Mutual Trust in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and Its Underpinning in the European Composite Constitutional Order, European Papers, Vol. 2, 2017, No 1, 141-157.
Plachta M., European Arrest Warrant: Revolution in Extradition? European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 2003, 178-194.
Pozdnakova A., Aleksei Petruhhin: Extradition of EU Citizens to Third States, European Papers, Vol. 2, 2017, No 1, 209-222.
Prechal S., Mutual Trust Before the Court of Justice of the European Union, European Papers, Vol. 2, 2017, No 1, 75-92.
Spencer J. R., Implementing the European Arrest Warrant: A Tale of How Not to Do It, Statute Law Review, 2009, 184-202.
TEU Treaty (Treaty on the European Union) (Maastricht Treaty) 1992.
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000.
Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European Arrest Warrant and the Surrender Procedures between Member States http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32002F0584, [18.12.2017].
TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) 2007.
Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community (The Reform Treaty) 2007.
Council Framework Decision of 26 February 2009 amending Framework Decisions 2002/584/JHA, 2005/214/JHA, 2006/783/JHA, 2008/909/JHA and 2008/947/JHA, thereby enhancing the procedural rights of persons and fostering the application of the principle of mutual recognition to decisions rendered in the absence of the person concerned at the trial http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.¬L_.2009¬.081.01.0024.01.ENG, [18.12.2017].
Aleksei Petruhhin [C 182/15], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?t¬ext=&docid=183097-&pageIn¬de¬x=0¬&doclang=EN&m¬ode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=315242, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Maria Pupino [C-105/03], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/docu¬ment/document.jsf?text=-&docid=59363&pageInd¬ex¬=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=316678, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
N.S. [C-411/10 and C-493/10], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text-=&docid=117187&¬pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=303874, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Niculaie Aurel Bob-Dogi [C-241/15], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/docum¬ent.jsf?text=¬&docid=-179221¬&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=307411, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Opinion 2/13 pursuant to Article 218 (11) TFEU — Draft international agreement — Accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Compatibility of the draft agreement with the EU and FEU Treaties, [2014], http://curia.eu-ropa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=160882&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=304567, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Ruslanas Kovalkovas, [C 477/16], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=¬&docid=18-5243&doclang=EN, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Stefano Melloni, [C 399/11], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=13¬5894&-page¬Index=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=304986, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Aranyosi and Căldăraru, [C-404/15 and C-659/15 PPU], http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/-document.jsf?-text=&docid=175547&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=302286, [18.12.2017], ECJ.
Presidency Conclusions at Tampere European Council 15 and 16 October 1999, http://www.¬europarl.-europa.eu/summits/tam_en.htm#union, [18.12.2017].
Evaluation report of the Council of 14 December 2007 concerning national practices relating to the European arrest warrant [Evaluation report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations ‘the practical application of the European arrest warrant and corresponding surrender procedures between Member States’: Report on Lithuania (12399/2/07 REV 2).
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 TSU Publishing House
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
