Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016CJ0453

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 November 2016.
Openbaar Ministerie v Halil Ibrahim Özçelik.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 8(1)(c) — Concept of ‘arrest warrant’ — Autonomous concept of EU law — National arrest warrant issued by a police service and confirmed by a public prosecutor for the purpose of criminal proceedings.
Case C-453/16 PPU.

Court reports – general

Case C‑453/16 PPU

Proceedings relating to the execution of a European arrest warrant issued against Halil Ibrahim Özçelik

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the rechtbank Amsterdam)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 8(1)(c) — Concept of ‘arrest warrant’ — Autonomous concept of EU law — National arrest warrant issued by a police service and confirmed by a public prosecutor for the purpose of criminal proceedings)

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 10 November 2016

Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — Concept of ‘judicial decision’ within the meaning of Article 8(1)(c) of the Framework Decision — Confirmation, by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State, of a national arrest warrant issued previously by a police service in connection with criminal proceedings — Included

(Council Framework Decision 2002/584, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, Art. 8(1)(c))

Article 8(1)(c) of the Framework Decision 2002/584 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, must be interpreted as meaning that a confirmation by the public prosecutor’s office, of a national arrest warrant issued previously by a police service in connection with criminal proceedings constitutes a ‘judicial decision’, within the meaning of that provision.

Since the public prosecutor’s office constitutes a Member State authority responsible for administering criminal justice, the confirmation of the national arrest warrant by that office provides the executing judicial authority with an assurance that the European arrest warrant is based on a decision that had undergone judicial approval such confirmation, therefore, justifies the high level of confidence between Member State.

(see paras 34, 36-38, operative part)

Top