The CJEU once again limits the denials of execution of OEDEs

soyeb19

In case C-158/21, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union, based in Luxembourg, has been able to resolve the preliminary ruling question that reached the Court on March 11, 2021 and that was raised by virtue of an order of March 9, 2021, issued by the Investigating Magistrate of special case 20907/2017, His Excellency. Mr. Pablo Llarena.

Following the successive refusals by the Courts of Justice of the Kingdom of Belgium to comply with the European Arrest and Surrender Orders ( OEDE , hereinafter) issued by the instructor in accordance with the provisions of Framework Decision 2002/584, (hereinafter, the DM) against those accused in procedural default Lluís Puig Gordi, Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó, Antoni Comín Oliveres , Clara Ponsatí Obiols, Meritxell Serret Aleu, Marta Rovira Vergés, Anna Gabriel Sabaté, the Supreme Court, through the Instructor, raises several questions that for the sake of synthesis and due to the content of the CJEU resolution are systematized into the following:

Can the Judicial Authority for the Execution of an EAW deny it for reasons not provided for in the Framework Decision , but provided for in its National Law ?
Can the Judicial Authority of Execution of an EAW question the Whatsapp Database competence of the Requesting Judicial Authority , and reject the execution if it understands that it is not competent?
Can the execution of an EAW be denied if the Judicial Execution Authority considers that there is a risk of violation of the Fundamental Rights of the defendant(s)? Is the report of a Working Group of an international organization (UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention) sufficient to justify the denial?



Does DM 2002/584 prohibit the Court sending an EAW from filing a new one against the same defendant(s) and before the judicial authorities of the same State?

Let us begin, first of all, by remembering that the DM, as established in its 10th recital, rests on the principles of  trust and mutual recognition of judicial resolutions  issued in the Member States in a common space of freedom, security and justice. The questioning of a resolution issued by a judicial body of a Member State must be very restrictive . Thus, the CJEU affirms that “ the execution of the European arrest warrant constitutes the principle, while the refusal of execution is conceived as an exception  that must be subject to strict interpretation” (judgment of April 29, 2021, Rechtbank Amsterdam , Case C-665/20, PPU). The execution of an EAW can only be denied for the mandatory reasons for non-execution of article 3 of the DM, for the optional reasons for non-execution of article 4, for the lack of guarantees that must be given by the State to which the Court issuing the OEDE belongs . the OEDE, or for lack of compliance with the formal requirements of the OEDE taken in accordance with article 8 of the DM.