Brussels, 03/06/2013 (Agence Europe) - Union law does not prevent the member states from bringing a suspensory appeal against a decision to extend the effects of a European arrest warrant. However, it does stipulate that when the member states choose to bring an appeal of this kind, the extension decision must be made within the deadlines laid down by the law of the Union on the European arrest warrant.
In this ruling returned on Thursday 30 May (case C-168/13 PPU), the Court of Justice of the EU is responding to the French Constitutional Council, which was approached by the French Court of Cassation on a priority question of constitutionality. The latter court asked in particular whether, by providing for the examining chamber to take position “without appeal” on a request for an extension of the effects of the European arrest warrant for infringements other than those behind the surrender to the authorities of another member state of an individual who is the subject of criminal investigations, the French criminal procedure law violated the right to legal appeal and the principle of equality before justice. Indeed, if the framework decision on the European arrest warrant was to be interpreted as excluding the possibility of an appeal of this kind for any reason (for example, because its institution would have been incompatible with the imperative deadlines for which it provides), the Constitutional Council would have been obliged to give Union law precedence and not recognise any right of appeal under the principles of constitutional value in France. Under these circumstances, the Constitutional Council asked the Court about the legality of a suspensory appeal of the execution of the European arrest warrant within 30 days from receipt of the request for the surrender of the individual wanted by another member state.
The Court replies that the framework decision on the European arrest warrant does not govern the possibility for the member states to stipulate suspensory appeals against decisions relating to the warrant in their own legislation. As a result, the member states are free to choose whether or not to provide for such appeals. However, their room for manoeuvre in such matters is subject to time limits for adoption. This means that a definitive decision on the execution of the warrant should be made, in theory, within 10 days following the agreement to surrender the wanted individual or, in other cases, within 60 days from the arrest of that person (this period may be extended by 30 days under exceptional circumstances). The decision to extend the warrant or for surrender at a later date must in theory be made within 30 days of receipt of the surrender request or, in the case of appeals, within 60 days of the arrest of the individual. (FG/transl.fl)