The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is a judicial cooperation instrument among European Union member states. It enables the apprehension of an individual residing in another member state and their transfer to the state conducting criminal proceedings or executing an imposed sentence. The procedure is designed as a faster and more efficient mechanism than traditional extradition. Issuance of an EAW may lead to the arrest of the pursued individual, proceedings before the court of the executing state, and ultimately their transfer to the competent authorities.
The EAW is a judicial decision based on the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions among EU member states. If the pursued individual is outside Poland but within the territory of another member state, Polish authorities may seek their arrest and transfer. The warrant serves both the conduct of criminal proceedings and the execution of a previously imposed custodial sentence. It is important to distinguish the European Arrest Warrant from extradition, as they are separate procedures based on different legal grounds.
In Poland, the decision to issue an EAW is not made by the police or prosecutor. According to Article 607a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the warrant is issued by the competent regional court. During the preparatory proceedings, this occurs upon the prosecutor's request. In judicial and enforcement proceedings, the regional court acts ex officio or upon the request of the competent district court. The mere departure of an individual from the country does not automatically result in the issuance of an EAW – it requires a decision by the competent court in each case.
The issue of an EAW should be considered primarily through the lens of the purpose of the proceedings and the location of the pursued individual. A court may issue an EAW if there is a reasonable presumption that the individual pursued for an offense under the jurisdiction of Polish criminal courts is residing in another EU member state. The issuance of the warrant must also be dictated by the interest of justice. This measure should not be applied automatically in every case, but rather appropriately to the nature of the proceedings and the purpose of the pursuit.
The criteria for issuing an EAW are not based on a single, closed list of acts. In Polish procedure, the statutory penalty threat is significant. An EAW is inadmissible in cases of offenses punishable by imprisonment of up to one year, and for the purpose of executing a sentence – when the imposed custodial sentence does not exceed four months. Therefore, an EAW may concern various offenses, provided they meet the statutory penalty thresholds.
Moreover, the regulations distinguish a specific list of acts relevant to the execution of the warrant and the assessment of so-called double criminality. This includes:
However, the EAW is not limited solely to the aforementioned offenses. This list plays a special role because, in these cases, the executing state does not examine whether the act constitutes an offense under its own law. Regarding other offenses, the requirement of double criminality may affect the possibility of executing the warrant. Each case requires an analysis of the specific legal qualification and the regulations of the states participating in the procedure.
After issuing an EAW, information about the sought individual is transmitted to the competent authorities of the state where the pursued individual resides, including through international information exchange systems. Upon arrest, the transfer procedure begins. In Poland, the prosecutor interviews the individual subject to the warrant, informs them of its content and their right to consent to the transfer, and then refers the case to the competent regional court. The court may apply temporary detention for the time necessary to conduct the procedure.
Detention under an EAW does not deprive the pursued individual of the right to defense. The detained individual must be informed of the content of the warrant and their rights, including the right to legal counsel, to make or refuse to make statements, and to participate in court hearings. An individual not proficient in the language of the proceedings is entitled to free interpreter assistance. Due to short procedural deadlines, prompt contact with a defense attorney handling criminal cases allows for the analysis of the EAW's grounds and potential reasons for refusing the transfer.
The execution of an EAW does not occur unconditionally. The Code of Criminal Procedure provides for both mandatory and discretionary grounds for refusing the transfer. The first group includes cases where executing the warrant would violate human rights and freedoms, where the individual is not criminally liable in Poland due to age, or where a final judgment has already been issued for the same act. In some situations, factors such as prescription, ongoing proceedings in Poland, or lack of double criminality of the act are also significant.
A final decision to execute an EAW results in the transfer of the individual to the competent authorities of the issuing state. If the purpose of the EAW is to conduct proceedings, the pursued individual is placed at the disposal of the authorities handling the case. When the warrant concerns the execution of a final judgment, the enforcement proceedings commence or continue after the transfer. At a later stage, issues related to the manner of serving the sentence may arise, including – if permitted by regulations and the convict's situation – the possibility of submitting a request for electronic monitoring.
The European Arrest Warrant facilitates the efficient transfer of pursued individuals between EU member states for the purpose of conducting criminal proceedings or executing an imposed sentence. Its issuance and execution depend on meeting strictly defined conditions, and in some cases, the court is obliged or has the option to refuse the transfer. Each case involving an EAW requires an individual assessment of the legal grounds, the situation of the pursued individual, and the circumstances of the specific proceedings.
The success and legal security of our clients are our top priorities. See how they evaluate their collaboration with the firm.
I highly recommend the Haber&Haber Law Firm and collaboration with Counsel Błażej Haber. Professionalism, diligence, and high personal culture assured me that I was in the right place. I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude for the empathy and humane approach to the client. In a word, a wonderful person.
I highly recommend 100%! This is undoubtedly one of the best attorneys. He addressed my issue immediately despite the limited time before the proceedings. The time of day for consultations was irrelevant. The case was concluded in the manner we had agreed upon. I advise others not to hesitate to call and discuss their situation.
