EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019CA0510
Case C-510/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Criminal proceedings against AZ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 6(2) — Concept of ‘executing judicial authority’ — Article 27(2) — Rule of speciality — Article 27(3)(g) and 27(4) — Derogation — Prosecution for an ‘offence other’ than that for which surrendered — Consent of the executing judicial authority — Consent of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the executing Member State)
Case C-510/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Criminal proceedings against AZ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 6(2) — Concept of ‘executing judicial authority’ — Article 27(2) — Rule of speciality — Article 27(3)(g) and 27(4) — Derogation — Prosecution for an ‘offence other’ than that for which surrendered — Consent of the executing judicial authority — Consent of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the executing Member State)
Case C-510/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Criminal proceedings against AZ (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 6(2) — Concept of ‘executing judicial authority’ — Article 27(2) — Rule of speciality — Article 27(3)(g) and 27(4) — Derogation — Prosecution for an ‘offence other’ than that for which surrendered — Consent of the executing judicial authority — Consent of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the executing Member State)
OJ C 35, 1.2.2021, p. 16–16
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
1.2.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 35/16 |
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 24 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Criminal proceedings against AZ
(Case C-510/19) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - European arrest warrant - Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA - Article 6(2) - Concept of ‘executing judicial authority’ - Article 27(2) - Rule of speciality - Article 27(3)(g) and 27(4) - Derogation - Prosecution for an ‘offence other’ than that for which surrendered - Consent of the executing judicial authority - Consent of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the executing Member State)
(2021/C 35/20)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hof van beroep te Brussel
Parties to the main criminal proceedings
AZ
Interveners: Openbaar Ministerie, YU, ZV
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
The concept of ‘executing judicial authority’ within the meaning of Article 6(2) 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, constitutes an autonomous concept of EU law which must be interpreted to the effect that it covers the authorities of a Member State which, without necessarily being judges or courts, participate in the administration of criminal justice in that Member State, acting independently in the exercise of the responsibilities inherent in the execution of a European arrest warrant and which exercise their responsibilities under a procedure which complies with the requirements inherent in effective judicial protection; |
|
2. |
Article 6(2) and Article 27(3)(g) and 27(4) of Framework Decision 2002/584, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, must be interpreted as meaning that the public prosecutor of a Member State who, although he or she participates in the administration of justice, may receive in exercising his or her decision-making power an instruction in a specific case from the executive, does not constitute an ‘executing judicial authority’ within the meaning of those provisions. |