Detention Pending Execution of the European Arrest Warrant – Dutch and Polish Experience. Some Reflection from the Human Rights Perspective

Małgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderek, Vincent Glerum
{"title":"Detention Pending Execution of the European Arrest Warrant – Dutch and Polish Experience. Some Reflection from the Human Rights Perspective","authors":"Małgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderek, Vincent Glerum","doi":"10.31743/recl.16268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on detention pending surrender, i.e. detention of the requested person in the executing Mem­ber State on the basis of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). It defines the scope of application of Article 5 of the Euro­pean Convention on Human Rights to such detention and anal­yses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on time limits of keeping the requested person in detention in the executing MS as well as on the notion of “the execut­ing judicial authority” entitled to decide on detention pending surrender. Both issues are explored with reference to national law and practice of the Netherlands and Poland. The article pro­vides the answer to the question whether national provisions which limit the duration of detention pending surrender prop­erly reflect the normative content of the framework decision on the EAW. The answer to this question is given with due regard to the standard of protection of the requested person stemming from Article 5 § 1 ECHR and Article 6 of the Charter of Funda­mental Rights. Furthermore, the analyses focus on Dutch and Polish provisions concerning the authority entitled to decide on detention pending surrender and their compliance with the CJEU’s jurisprudence on the notion of “the executing ju­dicial authority.” Recognising that detention is the basic meas­ure for ensuring the effectiveness of surrender, we try to define the limits of its use in the EAW procedure, stemming from the requirements of protection of human rights.","PeriodicalId":337306,"journal":{"name":"Review of European and Comparative Law","volume":"47 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31743/recl.16268","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article focuses on detention pending surrender, i.e. detention of the requested person in the executing Mem­ber State on the basis of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). It defines the scope of application of Article 5 of the Euro­pean Convention on Human Rights to such detention and anal­yses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on time limits of keeping the requested person in detention in the executing MS as well as on the notion of “the execut­ing judicial authority” entitled to decide on detention pending surrender. Both issues are explored with reference to national law and practice of the Netherlands and Poland. The article pro­vides the answer to the question whether national provisions which limit the duration of detention pending surrender prop­erly reflect the normative content of the framework decision on the EAW. The answer to this question is given with due regard to the standard of protection of the requested person stemming from Article 5 § 1 ECHR and Article 6 of the Charter of Funda­mental Rights. Furthermore, the analyses focus on Dutch and Polish provisions concerning the authority entitled to decide on detention pending surrender and their compliance with the CJEU’s jurisprudence on the notion of “the executing ju­dicial authority.” Recognising that detention is the basic meas­ure for ensuring the effectiveness of surrender, we try to define the limits of its use in the EAW procedure, stemming from the requirements of protection of human rights.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
等待执行欧洲逮捕令的拘留-荷兰和波兰的经验。人权视角下的思考
本条的重点是在移交前的拘留,即根据欧洲逮捕令将被请求的人拘留在执行会员国。界定了《欧洲人权公约》第5条对这种拘留的适用范围,并分析了欧盟法院关于将被请求人拘留在执行国的时间限制的判例法,以及关于“执行司法机关”有权决定在移交前拘留的概念。本文结合荷兰和波兰的国家法律和实践对这两个问题进行了探讨。该条回答了以下问题:限制在移交前拘留期限的国家规定是否恰当地反映了关于《禁止酷刑法》的框架决定的规范性内容。对这个问题的回答是在适当考虑到欧洲人权公约第5条第1款和《基本权利宪章》第6条对被请求人的保护标准的情况下给出的。此外,分析的重点是荷兰和波兰关于在移交之前有权决定拘留的当局的规定,以及它们是否符合欧洲法院关于“执行司法当局”概念的判例。鉴于拘留是确保移交有效性的基本措施,我们试图从保护人权的要求出发,界定其在EAW程序中使用的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Informed Consent in Clinical Studies in the Republic of Srpska EAW: Next Steps, Will Pandora’s Box Be Opened? Gloss on the Judgement of the Polish Supreme Court of 2 June 2022, I KZP 17/21 Obtaining Evidence Protected by Banking Secrecy through European Investigation Order in Preparatory Proceedings. Remarks from the Polish Perspective Translating and Interpreting the Letter of Rights
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1