The Council of the EU continues to closely monitor the impact of national measures taken to combat the spread of Covid-19 on judicial cooperation instruments in criminal matters. A note from the Secretariat-General of the EU Council, dated 30 April, summarises the latest information collected by Eurojust on this subject.
The document focuses mainly on the execution of European Arrest Warrants (EAWs), where the greatest difficulties have been observed in the phase of surrender of the requested person to the issuing Member State due to, for example, travel restrictions or flight cancellations.
To assist Member States in the implementation of this instrument during the pandemic, the European Commission also announced the establishment of a Crisis Management Group on the European Arrest Warrant (see EUROPE 12462/7) in cooperation with Eurojust, the European Judicial Network and the Secretariat-General of the Council of the EU.
According to the document, the legal framework of the European arrest warrant is generally considered “sufficient” to face the current situation. It makes it possible to postpone the surrender of the wanted person when such surrender is not immediately possible.
The executing judicial authorities are then called upon to review the extension of the person's arrest until actual surrender becomes possible. Several Member States have reported some cases where, based on the circumstances of the specific case, prolonging detention would be in conflict with the principle of proportionality and the executing judicial authorities have accordingly released the requested person and adopted measures to prevent the person from absconding (obligation to report to the police, travel ban, probation orders, bail, house arrest, etc.).
According to the document, Member States seem to have fewer difficulties in the context of extradition, which allows for the extension of surrender deadlines until the end of the crisis.
Other judicial cooperation instruments are also affected, including European Investigation Orders and requests for mutual legal assistance.
In most Member States, these instruments have been restricted to urgent cases and/or postponed, in particular in those Member States where the adopted state of emergency implies the suspension of procedural terms and hearings, the document points out.
Freezing and confiscation orders of criminal assets, on the other hand, seem to be less affected, as they are often considered urgent due to the risk of dissipation of assets.
Judicial cooperation in criminal matters is also undermined by remote working, with most judges and prosecutors working from home and the activities of the courts being limited to urgent cases, the document notes.
Most Member States have suspended the transfer of sentenced persons for the time being; however, where this takes place, the document stresses that sanitary rules need to be observed. Persons transferred to other Member States must, in principle, be placed in quarantine.
See document: https://bit.ly/2SCJGHG (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)