European Arrest Warrant
4.5.2011
Question for oral answer O-000112/2011
to the Commission
Rule 115
Jan Philipp Albrecht, Judith Sargentini, Heidi Hautala
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
The European Arrest Warrant has proved to be an effective instrument in fighting cross‑border crime and terrorism. However, its reputation is being tarnished by reports of it being used for questioning instead of prosecution and execution of sentences and minor offences without proper consideration of whether surrender is proportionate, notwithstanding the human and financial costs involved (estimated at EUR 25 000 per surrender procedure).
Furthermore, the decision not to execute a European Arrest Warrant is not always respected by the issuing Member State, meaning the person is arrested again once he or she crosses the border.
In addition, there is no facility for adequate legal representation for persons sought under a European Arrest Warrant both in the issuing and executing Member State. Finally, sadly, prison conditions in many EU Member States are so poor that they seriously undermine the trust in adequate treatment of prisoners upon which the European Arrest Warrant and the soon to be implemented framework decision on transfer of sentenced persons are based.
– How is the Commission going to guarantee that disproportionate use of the European Arrest Warrant is put to an immediate end both in law and practice?
– How is the Commission going to ensure that wanted persons under a European Arrest Warrant have an effective right to challenge a European Arrest Warrant both in the issuing and executing state and that a decision not to execute a European Arrest Warrant leads to a removal of the Schengen alert?
– How is the Commission going to ensure that criminal justice standards in the European Union are raised and prison conditions improved before the courts step in and block further transfers due to possible violation of the person's fundamental rights?
Tabled: 4.5.2011
Forwarded: 6.5.2011
Deadline for reply: 13.5.2011