Analysis of Judgment No. 47705 of 2024 on the European Arrest Warrant

The recent judgment No. 47705 of December 30, 2024, issued by the Court of Appeal of Milan, offers important insights into the procedure of the European arrest warrant. In particular, the Court declared the inadmissibility of the appeal to the Supreme Court regarding a judgment that declared its lack of jurisdiction for territory, referring the case to a different judge deemed competent. This decision is situated within the European and Italian regulatory context, highlighting the principle of the exhaustiveness of appeal remedies.

The regulatory context of the European Arrest Warrant

The European arrest warrant is a legal instrument created to facilitate judicial cooperation among the Member States of the European Union. Its introduction, which occurred with Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, aimed to simplify and expedite extradition procedures. However, the judgment under review reminds us that, despite this simplification, there are legal and procedural limits that must be respected.

The principle of the exhaustiveness of appeal remedies

The Court of Appeal invoked the principle of the exhaustiveness of appeal remedies, which implies that only appeals expressly provided for by law are admissible. In this case, the judgment declaring lack of jurisdiction for territory is not subject to appeal to the Supreme Court, but may give rise to a conflict of jurisdiction. This aspect is crucial, as it limits the possibilities of appeal and reinforces the certainty of law.

European arrest warrant - Surrender for extradition - Judgment declaring lack of jurisdiction for territory and referring the case to another court of appeal deemed competent - Appeal to the Supreme Court - Admissibility - Exclusion - Reasons. In the context of the European arrest warrant, the judgment by which the Court of Appeal declares its lack of jurisdiction for territory to decide on the request for surrender and refers the case to a different judge deemed competent, given the principle of the exhaustiveness of appeal remedies, is not subject to appeal to the Supreme Court, but can only give rise to a conflict of jurisdiction.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 47705 of 2024 represents an important reference point for jurisprudence in the matter of the European arrest warrant. It clarifies that the declaration of lack of jurisdiction for territory is not appealable to the Supreme Court, highlighting the necessity to respect the boundaries established by law. This jurisprudential orientation not only helps to define the rights of the accused but also strengthens cooperation among the Member States of the European Union, ensuring a balance between justice and legal certainty.

Bianucci Law Firm