Effective judicial protection and the European arrest warrant: Navigating between procedural autonomy and mutual trust

Abstract

The article explores the ECJ case law on effective judicial protection in EAW proceedings, looking critically at the interpretation of Article 47 CFR in this context. The article reveals the approach to national procedural autonomy within the EAW case law, emerging most distinctly from the ECJ’s interpretation of “judicial authority” under Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA. The case law analysis challenges the scholarly arguments according to which the Court’s interpretation of Article 47 CFR has contributed to a significant erosion of national procedural autonomy. By contrast, the article concludes that in the context of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, the ECJ case law has mostly sought to mitigate the impact of Article 47 on national procedural autonomy. The Court may have done so to accommodate specific policy priorities pertaining to the nature of the EAW system (e.g. the fight against impunity) and uphold the principle of mutual trust.While showing internal incoherence in the interpretation of the notion of “judicial independence”, the Court has thus far failed to provide convincing arguments to secure the right to an effective judicial remedy for requested individuals in the cases at hand. European arrest warrant, effective judicial protection, procedural autonomy, independence of the judiciary, right to an effective remedy