http://www.flynewsonline.com/2016/0...ported-from-britain-to-other-european-states/
Home Secretary Theresa May has cited the European Arrest Warrant as a key reason to stay in the EU
Suspected criminals should not be deported from Britain to other European countries if they might suffer poor treatment in prison, the EU’s top court ruled today.
In two cases relating to Hungarian and Romanian national, the European Court of Justice said European Arrest Warrants did not mean suspects should be automatically surrendered.
The EAW is designed to speed up the extradition process for European Union citizens who have fled one country and are wanted for criminal proceedings in another.
Home Secretary Theresa May cited the EAW as a key reason for Britain to stay a member of the European Union in June’s referendum.
But a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment in jail for the suspect is enough to halt extradition, ECJ judges ruled today.
The ECJ was asked about the legal position following cases in which warrants were issued in Hungary and Romania.
A Hungarian investigating magistrate issued two EAWs with respect to Pal Aranyosi, a Hungarian national, so that a criminal prosecution could be brought for alleged offences of forced entry and theft.
The other case involved an EAW issued by a Romanian court in relation to Robert Caldararu to secure the enforcement of a prison sentence of one year and eight months imposed for driving without a driving licence.
Both men were located in Germany, where Mr Caldararu is currently detained. Mr Aranyosi is not in custody.
A German regional court found that the detention conditions to which Mr Aranyosi and Mr Caldararu might be subject in the Hungarian and Romanian prisons respectively were contrary to fundamental rights.
The ruling highlighted provisions which prohibit inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Previously the European Court of Human Rights held that Romania and Hungary had infringed rights due to prison overcrowding.
The German court sought to clarify with the ECJ whether this meant the execution of arrest warrants can or must be refused, or made subject to the condition that information sufficient to establish that detention conditions are compatible with fundamental rights is obtained.
Where the risk derives from ‘general detention conditions’, this cannot in itself lead to the execution of the warrant being refused.
There must be substantial grounds for believing the individual concerned will be exposed to such a risk because of the conditions in which it is envisaged that he or she will be detained, the court found.
The ECJ does not decide the individual cases
Home Secretary Theresa May has cited the European Arrest Warrant as a key reason to stay in the EU
Suspected criminals should not be deported from Britain to other European countries if they might suffer poor treatment in prison, the EU’s top court ruled today.
In two cases relating to Hungarian and Romanian national, the European Court of Justice said European Arrest Warrants did not mean suspects should be automatically surrendered.
The EAW is designed to speed up the extradition process for European Union citizens who have fled one country and are wanted for criminal proceedings in another.
Home Secretary Theresa May cited the EAW as a key reason for Britain to stay a member of the European Union in June’s referendum.
But a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment in jail for the suspect is enough to halt extradition, ECJ judges ruled today.
The ECJ was asked about the legal position following cases in which warrants were issued in Hungary and Romania.
A Hungarian investigating magistrate issued two EAWs with respect to Pal Aranyosi, a Hungarian national, so that a criminal prosecution could be brought for alleged offences of forced entry and theft.
The other case involved an EAW issued by a Romanian court in relation to Robert Caldararu to secure the enforcement of a prison sentence of one year and eight months imposed for driving without a driving licence.
Both men were located in Germany, where Mr Caldararu is currently detained. Mr Aranyosi is not in custody.
A German regional court found that the detention conditions to which Mr Aranyosi and Mr Caldararu might be subject in the Hungarian and Romanian prisons respectively were contrary to fundamental rights.
The ruling highlighted provisions which prohibit inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Previously the European Court of Human Rights held that Romania and Hungary had infringed rights due to prison overcrowding.
The German court sought to clarify with the ECJ whether this meant the execution of arrest warrants can or must be refused, or made subject to the condition that information sufficient to establish that detention conditions are compatible with fundamental rights is obtained.
Where the risk derives from ‘general detention conditions’, this cannot in itself lead to the execution of the warrant being refused.
There must be substantial grounds for believing the individual concerned will be exposed to such a risk because of the conditions in which it is envisaged that he or she will be detained, the court found.
The ECJ does not decide the individual cases