News

An Advocate’s Perspective on the European Arrest Warrant

“Ten years after the introduction of the European Arrest Warrant, not only does its practical application pose many problems for the justice systems of EU member states, but it also still raises a series of doubts from the perspective of fundamental rights protection,” says advocate Mikołaj Pietrzak.

Last week, advocate Mikołaj Pietrzak conducted training on the application of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for a group of judges, prosecutors and advocates from EU countries. The purpose of the training, organized in Copenhagen by the European Institute of Public Administration, was to identify the most important problems in the application of EAW in EU member states.

In May this year, the European Union's Judicial Cooperation Unit (EUROJUST) published a report in which it listed the most significant problems in the application of EAW. Among these problems, EUROJUST notes slow communication between competent authorities in particular states and difficulties the countries experience in organizing translations of EAW into the language of the arrested person. It also notices countries’ failures to notify withdrawal of an EAW in a timely fashion, especially when the suspect or accused had been arrested. Professionals with practical experience also point out the problems related to the assessment of proportionality and the double representation requirement in cases concerning the execution of EAW.

In its report, published in May this year, among the most significant problems in the application of EAW, the European Union's Judicial Cooperation Unit (EUROJUST) included slow communication between competent authorities in particular states, difficulties the countries experience in organizing translations of EAW into the language of the arrested person, and failures to notify withdrawal of an EAW in a timely fashion, especially when the suspect or accused had been arrested. Professionals with practical experience also point out the problems related to the assessment of proportionality and the double representation requirement in cases concerning the execution of EAW.

The execution of EAW raises serious doubts when it comes to the use of pre-trial detention. “In the recent years, the experiences with EAW have shown that some countries rarely apply pre-trial detention for the period of EAW’s execution, while other use detention as if by default. Unfortunately, Poland belongs to the second category. These differences constitute one of the more serious problems for practical enforcement of the principle of mutual trust between EU countries,” says advocate Mikołaj Pietrzak.

Advocate Mikołaj Pietrzak further notes that deducting the time spent in detention arising from the execution of an EAW in a different member state from the total period of detention to be served in the country which issued the warrant is yet another practical, unresolved problem related to the application of EAW.