Abstract
The European Seascape of the Restricted Area (ERA) and the decision of the Council of Europe of the European Union (2002/584 / TAC) from 13 June 2002, was published in the Official Gazette of the European Community for 18 July 2002. European arrest warrant is in charge of the European Union before the moment of the convention for extradition, (без attach) between the European Union and the formal nationality Extradition procedure (без from the procedure) for the betrayal among the EU Member States and the EU based on European arrest warrant. The problem is based on the principle of reciprocal trust between the body on the burdens-members and on the reciprocal recognition of the publication of the act of the assembly from the punishable body on the one-year-old member and addressing it to the authorities so that the body is a member of the EU member-state.
Highlights
When European Commission publishes its own proposal on the Decision for the European arrest warrant, as well as in the period of speaking on the unconditional cessation, the citizen on the Member States of the EU is all still strongly influenced by the terrorist act of 11 September 2001
At the time of the introduction of the ball, which is more important than the battle with international terrorism and the organized crime, this is the main priority and is finalized in the Decision for the European arrest warrant
The European arrest warrant /EAW/ is based on the principle of the qualitative characteristics, as it is partly partially preempted by a double punishable, limited to national disqualifications, as regards citizens, practice and seals, are mutually recognized at the time of the act and are free to move within the framework of the EU
Summary
When European Commission publishes its own proposal on the Decision for the European arrest warrant, as well as in the period of speaking on the unconditional cessation, the citizen on the Member States of the EU is all still strongly influenced by the terrorist act of 11 September 2001. The issue concerned the gathering of legal and practical information on the consequences of the non-removal of a warrant from the Schengen Information System (SIS) II and INTERPOL databases in a case in which a person subject to an EAW or extradition request was dealt with in criminal proceedings on the same factual basis in another Member State. Since the Aranyosi and Căldăraru judgement of the CJEU of 5 April 2016, Eurojust has noted an increase in the number of EAW cases in which judicial authorities experienced difficulties with the execution of EAWs due to allegedly inadequate prison conditions in the issuing Member States. The briefing note summarises the judgement, mentions some of the main questions raised by the application of this judgement, and discusses Eurojust‟s possible role in this context
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
