Help us make the FRA website better for you!

Take part in a one-to-one session and help us improve the FRA website. It will take about 30 minutes of your time.

YES, I AM INTERESTED NO, I AM NOT INTERESTED

Croatia / Supreme Court / Kž-eun 7/16-4

F. E. H. van E. v. The State's Attorney Office of the Republic of Croatia
Policy area
Justice, freedom and security
Deciding body type
National Court/Tribunal
Deciding body
The Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia
Type
Decision
Decision date
29/02/2016

Χάρτης των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

Title II: Freedoms

Article 6 - Right to liberty and security

VIEW FULL CASE
  • Croatia / Supreme Court / Kž-eun 7/16-4

    Key facts of the case: 

    The State Attorney in Hague demanded the transfer under the European arrest warrant procedure of an EU citizen for commiting fraud, embezzlement, money laundering and forging documents.The Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia decided on the appeal  whether the failure to observe the time-limits stipulated in the Framework Decision ceases the obligation to surrender the person as well as on the total duration of the period that a person may be held is custody determined with the Act on Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters with European Union Member States which transposes EU law. In the first instance procedure, the County Court in Karlovac (Županijski sud u Karlovcu) adopted a decision stating that the conditions for surrender were met and prolonged the detention until the execution of transfer.

    The Supreme Court confirmed the first instance decision and applied the interpretation of the CJEU Lanigan case C‑237/15 PPU that the executing national courts are required to adopt decision on the EAW after the expiry of the time limits and that the EAW 2002/584/JHA does not preclude the length of the custody when not exessive, in accordance with national law and in light of the Charter. 

    Outcome of the case:
     
    The Supreme Court of Republic of Croatia rejected the appeal and confirmed the first instance decision of the court deciding that the obligation to adopt decision on the surrender does not end with the expiry of the time limits to bring decision and that the length of the total duration of custody must be in line with the national law, but the in exceptional circumstances may be prolonged in order to prevent absconding and secure effective surrender until final decision on the surrender is taken.
  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    The Court of Justice of the European Union gave interpretation on the length of the custody in accordance with Article 12 of the Framework Decision 2002/584/PUP (which is transposed in the Act on Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters with European Union Member States) in the case F.L., n. C-237/15 PPU from 16 July 2015. Namely the Court decided as following: „Articles 15(1) and 17 of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the executing judicial authority remains required to adopt the decision on the execution of the European arrest warrant after expiry of the time-limits stipulated in Article 17.

    The Article 12 of the said Framework Decision, read in conjunction with Article 17 and in the light of Article 6 of the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights, must be interpreted as not precluding, in such a situation, the holding of the requested person in custody, in accordance with the law of the executing Member State, even if the total duration for which that person has been held in custody exceeds those time-limits, provided that this duration is not excessive in light of the characteristics of the proceedure followed in the case of main proceedings, which is a matter to be ascertainedby the national court. If the executing judicial authority decides to bring the requested person’s custody to an end, that authority is required to attach to the provisional release of that person any measures it deems necessary so as to prevent him from absconding and to ensure that the material conditions necessary for his effective surrender remain fulfilled for as long as no final decision on the execution of the European arrest warrant has been taken.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)

    O trajanju zadržavanja tražene osobe (istražnom zatvoru) u skladu sa člankom 12. Okvirne odluke 2002/584/PUP (koja je prenesena u ZPSKS-EU – Glava II.) te rokovima i postupcima za donošenje odluke o izvršenju europskog uhidbenog naloga iz članka 15. i 17. te odluke, tumačenje je dao Sud Europske unije u predmetu F. L., broj C-237/15 PPU od 16. srpnja 2015. Naime, sud je odlučio slijedeće: „Članak 15. stavak 1. i članak 17. Okvirne odluke Vijeća 2002/584/PUP od 13. lipnja 2002. o Europskom uhidbenom nalogu i postupcima predaje između država članica, kako je izmijenjena Okvirnom odlukom Vijeća 2009/299/PUP od 26. veljače 2009., treba tumačiti na način da pravosudno tijelo izvršenja ostaje u obvezi donijeti odluku o izvršenju europskog uhidbenog naloga i nakon isteka rokova utvrđenih u navedenom članku 17.

    Članak 12. navedene Okvirne odluke, u vezi s njezinim člankom 17. u svjetlu članka 6. Povelje Europske unije o temeljnim pravima, treba tumačiti na način da se u navedenom slučaju ne protivi zadržavanju tražene osobe, u skladu s pravom države članice izvršenja, čak i ako ukupno trajanje razdoblja zadržavanja te osobe premašuje navedene rokove, pod uvjetom da to trajanje nije pretjerano s obzirom na obilježja postupka u predmetu iz glavnog postupka, što je dužan provjeriti sud koji je uputio zahtijev. Ako pravosudno tijelo izvršenja odluči okončati zadržavanje tražene osobe, tada je dužno njezino privremeno puštanje na slobodu popratiti svakom mjerom koju smatra nužnom radi sprječavanja njezina bijega, kao i osigurati ispunjavanje materijalnih preduvjeta potrebnih za učinkovitu predaju tražene osobe sve dok se ne donese konačna odluka o izvršenju europskog uhidbenog naloga.