Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluations of European Union Institutions, Doctrinal Assessments & Challenging

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
European Arrest Warrant

  • 1252 Accesses

Abstract

After comparison of the ‘surrender’ and the ‘extradition’ in the previous chapter, it should be assessed the clear evaluation of the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedure. The chapter deals with their evaluation. It is divided into four sections and is summarised with concluding observations. Section 14.1 is focused on the evaluations by the European Commission—the European Union’s institution which introduced the legislative proposal for the European arrest warrant. Subsequently, Sect. 14.2 is focused on the evaluations by the Council of the European Union, which adopted the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant. Moreover, on the ground that both European arrest warrant and the surrender procedure are not perfect, special attention is focused on Council’s recommendations. In addition to that, Sect. 14.3 examines the doctrinal assessments—positive as well as doubtful. Finally, Sect. 14.4 challenges the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedure. Its prime objective is, beside positive evaluations, to express that they are not perfect, again.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Mitsilegas (2009), p. 115.

  2. 2.

    Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 7 September 2010—Case C-261/09—Criminal proceedings against Gaetano Mantello, para. 1.

  3. 3.

    Commission of the European Communities (2005): ‘Report from the Commission based on Article 34 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’, COM(2005) 63 final; Commission of the European Communities (2005): ‘Annex to the Report from the Commission based on Article 34 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’, Commission staff working document, SEC(2005) 267.

  4. 4.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission based on Article 34 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’ (revised version), COM(2006) 8 final; Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Annex to the Report from the Commission based on Article 34 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’ (revised version), Commission staff working document, SEC(2006)79.

  5. 5.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission based on Article 34 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’ (revised version), COM(2006) 8 final, p. 2.

  6. 6.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission […]’ (revised version), p. 4.

  7. 7.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission […]’ (revised version), p. 4.

  8. 8.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission […]’ (revised version), p. 4.

  9. 9.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission […]’ (revised version), p. 6.

  10. 10.

    Commission of the European Communities (2006): ‘Report from the Commission […]’ (revised version), p. 7.

  11. 11.

    Commission of the European Communities (2007): ‘Report from the Commission on the implementation since 2005 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’, COM(2007) 407; Commission of the European Communities (2007): ‘Annex to the Report from the Commission on the implementation since 2005 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’, Commission staff working document, SEC(2007) 979.

  12. 12.

    Commission of the European Communities (2007): ‘Report from the Commission on the implementation since 2005 […]’, p. 3.

  13. 13.

    Commission of the European Communities (2007): ‘Report from the Commission on the implementation since 2005 […]’, p. 4.

  14. 14.

    Commission of the European Communities (2007): ‘Report from the Commission on the implementation since 2005 […]’, p. 4.

  15. 15.

    Commission of the European Communities (2007): ‘Report from the Commission on the implementation since 2005 […]’, p. 3.

  16. 16.

    European Commission (2011): ‘Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation since 2007 of the Council Framework Decision of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’, COM(2011) 175.

  17. 17.

    European Commission (2011): ‘Report from the Commission […] on the implementation since 2007 […]’, p. 3.

  18. 18.

    European Commission (2011): ‘Report from the Commission […] on the implementation since 2007 […]’, p. 11.

  19. 19.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations – The practical application of the European Arrest Warrant and corresponding surrender procedures between Member States’, document No. 8302/2/09, REV 2.

  20. 20.

    As far as the Slovak Republic is concerned, see Council of the EU document No. 7060/1/09 CRIMORG 33.

  21. 21.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 5.

  22. 22.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, pp. 7 et seq.

  23. 23.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 7.

  24. 24.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 8.

  25. 25.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 11.

  26. 26.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 13.

  27. 27.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 15.

  28. 28.

    Council of the European Union (2009): ‘Final report on the fourth round of mutual evaluations […]’, p. 18.

  29. 29.

    See documents of the Council of the European Union: Austria—7024/1/08, REV 1, pp. 40 et seq.; Belgium—16454/2/06, REV 2, pp. 51 et seq.; Bulgaria—8265/2/09, REV 2, pp. 35 et seq.; 14111/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Cyprus—14135/2/07, REV 2, pp. 48 et seq.; Czech Republic—15691/2/08, REV 2, pp. 45 et seq.; 13743/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Denmark—13801/2/06, REV 2, pp. 42 et seq.; Estonia—5301/2/07, REV2, pp. 40 et seq.; 14276/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Finland—11787/2/07, REV 2, pp. 40 et seq.; 14282/11, pp. 1 et seq.; France—9972/2/07, REV 2, pp. 49 et seq.; 14286/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Germany—7058/2/09, REV 2, pp. 45 et seq.; 14446/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Greece—13416/2/08, REV 2, pp. 41 et seq.; Hungary—15317/2/07, REV 2, pp. 35 et seq.; 14243/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Ireland—11843/2/06, REV 2, pp. 49 et seq.; Italy—5832/2/09, REV 2, pp. 75 et seq.; 17113/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Latvia—17220/1/08, REV 1, pp. 34 et seq.; Lithuania—12399/2/07, REV 2, pp. 37 et seq.; 17135/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Luxembourg—10086/2/07, REV 2, pp. 38 et seq.; 13324/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Malta—9617/2/08, REV 2, pp. 37 et seq.; the Netherlands—15370/2/08, REV 2, pp. 53 et seq.; Poland—14240/2/07, REV 2, pp. 61 et seq.; 13691/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Portugal—7593/2/07, REV 2, pp. 43 et seq.; 13706/11, pp. 2 et seq.; Romania—8267/2/09, REV 2, pp. 37 et seq.; Slovakia—7060/2/09, REV 2, pp. 37 et seq.; 16895/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Slovenia—7301/2/08, REV 2, pp. 39 et seq.; 14032/11, pp. 2 et seq.; Spain—5085/2/07, REV 2, pp. 48 et seq.; 15111/11, pp. 1 et seq.; Sweden—9927/2/08, REV 2, pp. 45 et seq.; 14876/11, pp. 1 et seq.; and United Kingdom—9974/2/07, REV 2 EXT 1, pp. 69 et seq.

  30. 30.

    Záhora (2012), p. 297.

  31. 31.

    Cryer et al. (2010), p. 94.

  32. 32.

    Apap and Carrera (2004), p. 16.

  33. 33.

    Lagodny (2005), pp. 39 and 40.

  34. 34.

    Klip (2012), pp. 411 and 412.

  35. 35.

    Vennemann (2003), pp. 105 and 121.

  36. 36.

    Bureš (2009), p. 29.

  37. 37.

    Mackarel (2007), pp. 43 and 45.

  38. 38.

    Gay (2006).

  39. 39.

    Long (2009), p. 10.

  40. 40.

    van Sliedregt (2007), pp. 252 and 253.

  41. 41.

    Deen-Racsmány (2007), pp. 170, 171 and 173.

  42. 42.

    Zurek (2012), p. 66.

  43. 43.

    Mitsilegas (2009), p. 115.

  44. 44.

    Peers (2011), p. 293.

  45. 45.

    Fletcher et al. (2008), p. 11.

  46. 46.

    Dumitrescu (2011), p. 147.

  47. 47.

    Council Framework Decision 2003/577/JHA of 22nd July 2003 on the execution in the European Union of orders freezing property or evidence. Official Journal of the European Union, L 195/45 of 2.8.2003.

  48. 48.

    Council Framework Decision 2008/978/JHA of 18th December 2008 on the European evidence warrant for the purpose of obtaining objects, documents and data for use in proceedings in criminal matters. Official Journal of the European Union, C 115/13 of 9.5.2008.

  49. 49.

    See: Allegrezza (2010), pp. 569–579; Murphy (2011), pp. 224–248; Klimek (2012b), pp. 250–290; or Klimek (2012a), pp. 919–936.

  50. 50.

    Article 1(2) of the Framework Decision on the EAW.

  51. 51.

    Commission of the European Communities (2001): ‘Proposal for a Council Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States’, COM(2001) 522 final/2, p. 5.

  52. 52.

    Mitsilegas (2009), p. 115.

  53. 53.

    Bureš (2011), pp. 170 and 171.

  54. 54.

    Recital 10 of the Framework Decision on the EAW.

  55. 55.

    Fletcher et al. (2008), p. 111.

  56. 56.

    Vernimmen-Van Tiggelen and Surano (2008), p. 20.

  57. 57.

    van Sliedregt (2007), p. 245.

  58. 58.

    Parliament of the Kingdom of Great Britain (2007): ‘Justice and Home Affairs Issues at European Union Level: Third Report of Session 2006–2007: Volume I’, The Stationery Office Limited, pp. 50 and 51.

References

  • Allegrezza S (2010) Critical remarks on the Green Paper on obtaining evidence in criminal matters from one Member State to another and securing its admissibility. Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 5:569–579

    Google Scholar 

  • Apap J, Carrera S (2004) European arrest warrant: a good testing ground for mutual recognition in the enlarged EU? Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureš O (2009) European arrest warrant: implications for EU counterterrorism efforts. Cent Eur J Int Secur Stud 3:21–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureš O (2011) EU counterterrorism policy: a paper tiger? Ashgate, Farnham/Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Cryer R, Friman H, Robinson D, Wilmshurst E (2010) An introduction to international criminal law and procedure, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Deen-Racsmány Z (2007) Lessons of the European arrest warrant for domestic implementation of the obligation to surrender nationals to the International Criminal Court. Leiden J Int Law 20:167–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumitrescu L (2011) The evolution of criminal judicial cooperation in the European Union. Revista de Stiinte Politice 32:141–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher M, Lööf R, Gilmore B (2008) EU criminal law and justice. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham/Northampton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gay C (2006) The European arrest warrant and its application by the Member States. In: European issues, No. 16/2006. http://www.asser.nl/upload/eurowarrant-webroot/documents/cms_eaw_id1675_1_EuropeanIssues.16.pdf. Accessed 29 Dec 2008

  • Klimek L (2012a) Fragmented concept of free movement of evidence in criminal matters in the EU: how to solve it? In: Žatecká E et al (eds) COFOLA 2012: conference proceedings. Právnická fakulta Masarykovy univerzity, Brno, pp 919–936

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimek L (2012b) Free movement of evidence in criminal matters in the EU. Lawyer Q 2:250–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Klip A (2012) European criminal law: an integrative approach, 2nd edn. Intersentia, Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagodny O (2005) Extradition’ without a granting procedure: the concept of ‘surrender’. In: Blekxtoon R, van Ballegooij W (eds) Handbook on the European arrest warrant. T. M. C. Asser Press, The Hague, pp 39–45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Long N (2009) Implementation of the European arrest warrant and Joint Investigation Teams at EU and National Level. European Parliament, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackarel M (2007) The European arrest warrant – the early years: implementing and using the warrant. Eur J Crime Crim Law Crim Justice 15:37–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsilegas V (2009) EU criminal law. Hart, Oxford/Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy CC (2011) The European evidence warrant: mutual recognition and mutual (dis)trust? In: Eckes C, Konstadinides T (eds) Crime within the area of freedom, security and justice: a European public order. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 224–248

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peers S (2011) EU justice and home affairs law (non-civil). In: Craig P, De Búrca G (eds) The evolution of EU law, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 269–298

    Google Scholar 

  • van Sliedregt E (2007) The European arrest warrant: between trust, democracy and the rule of law. Introduction. The European arrest warrant: extradition in transition. Eur Const Law Rev 3:244–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vennemann N (2003) The European arrest warrant and its human rights implications. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 63:103–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernimmen-Van Tiggelen G, Surano L (2008) Analysis of the future of mutual recognition in criminal matters in the European Union. Institute for European Studies, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles

    Google Scholar 

  • Záhora J (2012) Implementácia Európskeho zatýkacieho rozkazu v podmienkach Slovenskej republiky [transl.: Implementation of the European arrest warrant in the Slovak Republic]. In: Záhora J (ed) Aktuálne otázky trestného zákonodarstva. Zborník príspevkov z celoštátnej konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou konanej dňa 19. januára 2012 [transl.: Current issues of criminal law legislative power. Conference proceedings of statewide conference with international participation held on 19th January 2012]. Eurokódex, Bratislava, pp 283–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Zurek J (2012) Against tradition: the European arrest warrant. Educ Sci Without Borders 3:66–70

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Pan-European University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic

    Libor Klimek

Authors
  1. Libor Klimek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Klimek, L. (2015). Evaluations of European Union Institutions, Doctrinal Assessments & Challenging. In: European Arrest Warrant. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07338-5_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation