Lack of Fair Judicial Review of Pre-Trial Detention after Surrendering the Prosecuted Person as an Absolute Obstacle to Extradition

Przemysław Tarwacki

Abstract


The article is a research and scientific study prepared using the dogmatic method. It addresses the most sensitive issues that the Polish Supreme Court has dealt with in recent years in the area of interpretation of obstacles to extradition, i.e. the problem of the lack of prompt and ex officio judicial review of non-judicial pre-trial detention at the stage of preparatory proceedings in the State requesting the extradition of a prosecuted person. In one of its rulings, which is crucial in this matter, the Supreme Court took the position that this deficiency was not a sufficient basis for finding a legal obstacle to extradite the prosecuted. The argumentation of the Court does not deserve full approval. It is a manifestation of failure to notice the requirement, under Article 5 (3) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to bring each detained person promptly ex officio before a judge in the context of their personal security. It should be assumed that the lack of prompt and ex officio review of pre-trial detention at the stage of the preparatory proceedings, including bringing the detained person before a judge, after the defendant has been transferred to the authorities of the requesting state, may constitute grounds for assuming that there is a well-founded concern about violation of the defendant’s personal security for this reason. Such an assessment should be made a casu ad casum as necessary, after supplementing the information from the requesting party.


Keywords


extradition; personal security of the defendant; obstacles to extradition; prompt judicial review of pre-trial detention; ex officio judicial review of pre-trial detention; bringing the detained person to the judge

Full Text:

PDF

References


LITERATURE

Hofmański P., [in:] Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności, vol. 1: Komentarz do artykułów 1–18, ed. L. Garlicki, Legalis 2010.

Nita B., Hermeliński W., Prawa i wolności obywatelskie w postępowaniu ekstradycyjnym, [in:] Transformacja systemów wymiaru sprawiedliwości, vol. 2: Proces transformacji i dylematy wymiaru sprawiedliwości, ed. J. Jaskiernia, Toruń 2011.

Nita-Światłowska B., [in:] Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz, ed. J. Skorupka, Warszawa 2016.

Nowicki M.A., Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka. Wybór orzeczeń 2006, Warszawa 2007.

Płachta M., Prawa człowieka w kontekście przeszkód ekstradycyjnych, “Palestra” 2003, no. 5–6.

Steinborn S., [in:] Komentarz aktualizowany do art. 425–673 Kodeksu postępowania karnego, ed. L. Paprzycki, LEX/el. 2015.

Zach G., [in:] The United Nations Convention against Torture and Its Optional Protocol: A Commentary, eds. M. Nowak, M. Birk, G. Monina, Oxford 2019.

ONLINE SOURCES

Council of Europe, 24th General Report of the CPT: European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Strasbourg 2015, https://rm.coe.int/1680696a9c (access: 16.4.2024).

LEGAL ACTS

Act of 19 April 1969 – Criminal Procedure Code (Journal of Laws 1969, no. 13, item 96, as amended).

Act of 6 June 1997 – Criminal Procedure Code (consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2022, item 1375).

Agreement between the Polish People’s Republic and the Republic of Tunisia on legal assistance in civil and criminal matters, signed in Warsaw on 22 March 1985 (Journal of Laws 1987, no. 11, item 71).

Agreement between the Polish People’s Republic and the Turkish Republic on legal assistance in criminal matters, extradition and transfer of sentenced persons, signed in Ankara on 9 January 1989 (Journal of Laws 1991, no. 52, item 552, as amended).

Agreement on legal assistance and legal relations in civil, family, labour and criminal matters of 26 October 1994, concluded between the Republic of Poland and the Republic of Belarus (Journal of Laws 1995, no. 128, item 619).

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (OJ C 326/391, 26.10.2012).

Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 2 April 1997 (Journal of Laws 1997, no. 78, item 483, as amended).

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Rome, 4 November 1950, ETS no. 005.

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1984, UNTS, vol. 1465, p. 85.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature in New York on 19 December 1966, UNTS, vol. 999, p. 171 and vol. 1057, p. 407.

CASE LAW

Decision of the Court of Appeal in Wroclaw of 21 January 2004, II AKz 407/03, LEX no. 116783.

Decision of the Court of Appeal in Lublin of 5 May 2005, II AKz 114/05, LEX no. 287466.

Decision of the Human Rights Committee of 24 July 2008, 1450/2006, in case Komarovski v. Turkmenistan.

Decision of the Supreme Court of 20 April 2011, IV KK 422/10, LEX no. 846391.

Decision of the Supreme Court of 5 April 2017, III KO 112/16, LEX no. 2281234.

Decision of the Supreme Court of 4 April 2018, III KK 355/17, LEX no. 2486129.

Decision of the Supreme Court of 7 August 2019, III KK 241/19, LEX no. 2740953.

Decision of the Supreme Court of 4 September 2019, IV KO 78/19, LEX no. 3364086.

Decision of the Supreme Court of 20 May 2020, I KO 6/19, LEX no. 3106001.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 18 December 1996 in case Aksoy v. Turkey, application no. 21987/93.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 29 April 1999 in case Aquilina v. Malta, application no. 25642/94.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 4 July 2000 in case Niedbala v. Poland, application no. 27915/95.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 2 July 2002 in case Dacewicz v. Poland, application no. 34611/97.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 19 December 2002 in case Salapa v. Poland, application no. 35489/97.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 3 April 2003 in case Klamecki v. Poland, application no. 31583/96.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 11 July 2006 in case Harkman v. Estonia, application no. 2192/03.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 17 January 2012 in case Othman (Abu Qatada) v. UK, application no. 8139/09.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 26 June 2014 in case Shcherbina v. Russia, application no. 41970/11.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.2.281-298
Date of publication: 2024-06-27 10:20:50
Date of submission: 2022-11-30 15:24:03


Statistics


Total abstract view - 366
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 0

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Przemysław Tarwacki

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.