2017年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_Europes_most_wanted_Recalibrating_Trust_in_the_European_Arrest_Warrant_System_46页_1mb

Summary of "Europe's most wanted?" – Recalibrating Trust in the European Arrest Warrant System

Core Content

This paper, authored by Sergio Carrera, Elspeth Guild, and Nicholas Hernanz, provides an analysis of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) system's application between 2005 and 2011. It evaluates both the practical uses and misuses of the EAW, focusing on the challenges that have emerged in maintaining the principle of mutual trust between EU member states. The EAW, introduced as a cornerstone of EU criminal justice cooperation, has faced significant scrutiny due to issues of proportionality and the division of powers, which threaten its legitimacy and effectiveness.

Main Quantitative Results

• Total EAW requests issued by EU member states (2005-2011): 78,785
• EAWs resulting in effective surrender: 19,841
• Average surrender rate: Around 25% (approximately 25% of issued EAWs led to actual surrender)

Distribution of EAWs

• Top EAW issuers (2005-2011):

  • Poland: 31%
  • Germany: 14%
  • France: 11%
  • Romania, Spain, Hungary, Austria: 5% each
  • Lithuania: 4%

• Top EAW recipients (2005-2011):

  • Germany: 50%
  • UK: 25%
  • Spain: 7%
  • France: 4%

• Top countries in terms of surrendering persons (2005-2011):

  • Spain: 5,279 surrenders
  • Germany: 4,280 surrenders
  • UK: 3,775 surrenders
  • France: 3,580 surrenders
  • Netherlands: 1,639 surrenders
  • Austria: 1,374 surrenders
  • Romania: 1,246 surrenders

Key Issues and Challenges

Principle of Proportionality

• The EAW system has been criticized for the disproportionate use of warrants for minor offenses, which may undermine the rights of the requested individuals.
• The European Commission acknowledged this issue in its 2011 report, noting that EAWs issued for cases where pre-trial detention would otherwise be considered inappropriate may have a disproportionate impact on personal liberty.
• There is a lack of uniformity in the nature of the competent judicial authority, with some member states allowing non-judicial actors to issue EAWs, thereby reducing judicial oversight and political independence.

Principle of Division of Powers

• The EAW system has raised concerns about the separation of powers, as it involves judicial authorities making decisions that are influenced by national governments.
• The paper highlights the need for an independent, impartial, and objective evaluation mechanism to determine when the EAW is appropriately used, rather than relying on political considerations.
• The case of Julian Assange illustrates how the EAW can be challenged in terms of its alignment with constitutional and legal principles of separation of powers.

Main Findings

• The EAW system is based on the assumption of mutual trust among EU member states, but this trust has been increasingly questioned.
• The system's effectiveness is undermined by inconsistent application and lack of transparency in the surrender process.
• Member states have different interpretations of what constitutes a 'serious' or 'minor' crime, leading to variability in how the EAW is applied.
• The principle of double criminality has been excluded for certain offenses, which may lead to overreach and potential human rights violations.
• The statistical data on EAWs are incomplete, inconsistent, and subject to methodological flaws, making it difficult to assess the system's performance accurately.

Policy Suggestions

• A revised framework for the EAW should be developed to ensure better accountability, impartial scrutiny, and transparency.
• A bottom-up approach is necessary, where independent judicial actors are responsible for evaluating the necessity and proportionality of EAWs.
• The system should be supported by improved statistical collection, impartial evaluation mechanisms, and qualitative assessments of implementation.
• There is a need for new policy stakeholders and structures that can address the growing mistrust in the EAW system and ensure its alignment with fundamental rights and EU legal principles.

Conclusion

The EAW system, while a significant step in EU criminal justice cooperation, is facing a dual conundrum: ensuring proportionality and maintaining the separation of powers. These challenges call for a recalibration of trust in the system, supported by robust, independent, and transparent mechanisms. Without such reforms, the EAW may lose its legitimacy and fail to meet the standards of fairness and justice that underpin the European Union's legal framework.