Poland: Constitutional Tribunal on the Surrender of Polish Citizens under the European Arrest Warrant. Decision of 27 April 2005.

European Constitutional Law Review

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 569-581

  Łazowski, Adam ^a  

^a TMC Asser Institute   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Constitutional Tribunal; Criticism; European Arrest Warrant; Extradition; Poland; Polish Constitution; Surrender

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011912446     PISSN: 15740196     EISSN: 17445515     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1574019605005699     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Penal Procedure Code of 6 June 1997 (as amended) [Kodeks postępowania karnego z dnia 6 czerwca 1997 roku], Dziennik Ustaw [1997] No. 89, Item 555.
2. The Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 2 April 1997 [Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 roku] Dziennik Ustaw [1997] No. 78, Item 483 (hereinafter referred to as Constitution).
3. The English translation of the Constitution is available in A. Pol and W. Odrowqz-Sypniewski (eds.), Polish Constitutional Law. The Constitution and Selected Statutory Materials 2 edn. (Warsaw, Chancellery of the Sejm 2000) p. 25. All the quotes from the Constitution inserted throughout this contribution originate from this book unless stated otherwise.
4. ECJ, Case C-105/03 Criminal Proceedings against Maria Pupino, ECR [2005] nyr.
5. See, inter alia, R. Blekxtoon and W. van Ballegooij (eds.), Handbook on the European Arrest Warrant (The Hague, T.M.C. Asser Press 2004)
6. M. Plachta, ‘European Arrest Warrant: Revolution in Extradition?’, 2 European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice (2003) p. 177
7. J. Wouters, F. Naert, ‘Of arrest warrants, terrorist offences and extradition deals: An appraisal of the EU's main criminal law measures against terrorism after “11 September”’, 41 CMLRev. (2004) p. 909
8. A. Górski, A. Sakowicz, ‘Komentarz do Decyzji Ramowej 2002/584/WSiSW [Commentary to the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA] in E. Zielinska (eds.), Prawo Wspólnot Europejskich a prawo polskie. Dokumenty karne, czqsc II [Law of the European Communities and Polish law. Penal documents, part II] (Warsaw, Oficyna Naukowa 2005) p. 266
9. E. Piontek, ‘Europejski Nakaz Aresztowania’ [European Arrest Warrant] 4 Panstwo i Prawo (2004) p. 33.
10. For a historical account see M. Plachta, W. van Ballegooij, ‘The Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant and Surrender Procedures Between Member States of the European Union’, in Blekxtoon and Van Ballegooij (eds.), Panstwo i Prawo n. 8, at p. 13–38.
11. See O. Lagodny, ‘“Extradition” without a Granting Procedure: The Concept of “Surrender”’, in Blekxtoon and Van Ballegooij, Panstwo i Prawo n. 8, at p. 39–45
12. Plachta, Panstwo i Prawo n. 8, at p. 190–194.
13. In a number of cases the Constitutional Tribunal argued that an obligation to approximate domestic law with the acquis communautaire is not only realised by legislative interventions but also by pro-European interpretation of Polish law. See S. Biernat, ‘Die “europäische” Rechtsprechung polnischer Gerichte vor dem Beitritt zur Europäischen Union, in J. Masing, W. Erbguth (eds.), Die Bedeutung der Rechtsprechung im System der Rechtsquellen. Europarecht und nationales Recht (Stuttgart, Richard Boorberg Verlag 2005) p. 191
14. A. Lazowski, ‘Proeuropejska wykladnia prawa przez polskie sqdy i organy administracji jako mechanizm dostosowania systemu prawnego do acquis communautaire’ [Pro-European Interpretation of Law as a Method of Approximation of Legal System with Acquis Communautaire], in E. Piontek (eds.) Prawo polskie a prawo Unii Europejskiej [Polish Law and Law of the European Union] (Warsaw, Liber 2003) p. 181.
15. See Ch. Hillion, ‘The Copenhagen Criteria and their Progeny’, in Ch. Hillion (ed.), EU Enlargement. A Legal Approach (Oxford-Portland Oregon, Hart Publishing 2004) p. 1
16. M. Cremona, Accession to the European Union: Membership Conditionality and Accession Criteria’, XXV PolYBIL (2001) p. 219
17. F. Hoffmeister, ‘Changing requirements for Membership’, in A. Ott and K. Inglis (eds.), Handbook on European Enlargement. A Commentary on the Enlargement Process (The Hague, T.M.C. Asser Press 2002) p. 90.
18. OJ 1993 l 348/2.
19. See E. Piontek, ‘Central and Eastern European Countries in Preparation for Membership in the European Union - A Polish Perspective’, 1 Yearbook of Polish European Studies (1997) p. 73
20. A. Lazowski, Approximation of Laws’, in Ott and Inglis, Yearbook of Polish European Studies n. 13, at p. 631
21. A. Lazowski, Adaptation of the Polish Legal System to European Union Law: Selected Aspects’, Sussex European Institute Working Paper No. 45.
22. See K. Inglis, ‘The Accession reaty and its Transitional Arrangements: A Twilight Zone for the New Member States of the European Union’, in Hillion, Sussex European Institute Working Paper n. 13, at p. 77.
23. OJ 2003 L 236/17.
24. See A. ŁazowsJci, ‘Implementation ot the intra Prillar Acquis. A Challenge for the Applicant Countries?’, in G. de Kerchove, A. Weyembergh (eds.), Sécurité et justice: enjeu de la politique extérieure de l'Union européenne (Éditions de L'Université de Bruxelles, Bruxelles 2003) p. 157.
25. Council of Europe Treaty Series No. 185.
26. OJ 1995 C 316/49.
27. Act amending the Criminal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and Minor Offences Code [Ustawa z dnia 18 marca 2004 r. o zmianie ustawy - Kodeks karny, ustawy - Kodeks postęjowania karnego oraz ustawy - Kodeks wykroczeń], Dziennik Ustaw [2004] No. 69 Item 626.
28. For an overview of these provisions see, inter alia, T. Grzegorczyk, ‘Procedowanie w sprawie europejskiego nakazu aresztowania’ [Procedure on the European Arrest Warrant], 4 Prokuratura i Prawo (2005) p. 7
29. W. Grzeszczyk, ‘Zmiany w prawie karnym wprowadzone usta wą z dnia 16 kwietnia 2004 r.’ [Changes to Penal Law Introduced by the Act of Parliament of April 16, 2004], 9 Prokuratura i Prawo (2004) p. 71.
30. The Constitutional Tribunal Act (as amended) [Ustawa z dnia 1 sierpnia 1997 o Trybunale Konstytucyjnym] Dziennik Ustaw (1997) No. 102, Item 643.
31. See, inter alia, E. Piontek, ‘Opinia uzupełniająca w przedmiocie wdrożema ENA do prawa polskiego’ [Supplementary Opinion on Implementation of EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT in Polish Law]
32. P. Sarnecki, ‘Opinia na temat konstytucyjności projektu ustawy w sprawie nowelizacji kodeksu kamego, kodeksu postępowania kamego i kodeksu wykroczeń’ [Opinion on Conformity with the Constitution of the Bill amending the Penal Code, Penal Procedure Code and Minor Offences Code]
33. M. Płachta, ‘Opinia w sprawie projektu ustawy o zmianie Kodeksu karnego, Kodeksu postępowania karnego oraz Kodeksu wykroczen’ [Opinion on the Bill amending the Penal Code, Penal Procedure Code and Minor Offences Code]. All of the above opinions are available at the website of the Sejm (lower chamber of the Polish Parliament) at .
34. See ‘Opinia o projekcie ustawy o zmianie ustawy — Kodeks karny oraz ustawy — Kodeks postępowania karnego [europejski nakaz aresztowania]’ [Opinion on the Bill amending the Penal Code and Penal Procedure Code [European Arrest Warrant]], in 42 Przegląd Legislacyjny (2004) p. 147.
35. Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, OJ 2004 C 310/1.
36. See more S. de Groot, ‘Mutual Trust in (European) Extradition Law’, in Blekxtoon and Van Ballegooij (eds.), Przegląd Legislacyjny n. 8, at p. 83.
37. E Zielińska, ‘Ekstradycja a europejski nakaz aresztowania. Studium róznic’ [Extradition and the European Arrest Warrant. The Study of Differences] as quoted by the Constitutional Tribunal in para. III-3.2. of the judgment
38. P. Kruszyński, ‘Europejski Nakaz Aresztowania jako forma realizacji zasady wzajemnego wykonywania orzeczeń w ramach UE - Jaką rolę należy przypisać E.N.A. w procesie tworzenia Wspolnego Obszaru Wolnościm Bezpieczeństwa i Sprawiedliwości UE -opierającego się na zasadzie wzajemnego uznawania i wykonywania orzeczeń?’ [European Arrest Warrant as a Form of Realisation of the Principle of Mutual Execution of Judgments in the EU - What is the Role of European Arrest Warrant in the Creation of an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice based on the Principle of Mutual Trust and Execution of Judgments?] as quoted by the Constitutional Tribunal in para. III-3.2 of the judgment.
39. See Constitutional Tribunal n. 28 at p. 156.
40. See, inter alia, ECJ Case 14/83 Sabine von Colson and Elisabeth Kamann v. Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, ECR [1984] 1891.
41. For an academic appraisal see, inter alia, S. Drake, ‘Twenty years after Von Colson: the impact of “indirect effect” on the protection of the individual's Community rights’, 30 ELRev. (2005) p. 329–348.
42. ECJ, Case 106/77 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v. Simmenthal, ECR [1978] p. 644
43. Case C-416/00 Tommaso Morellato v. Comune di Padova, ECR [2003] I-9343.
44. See, inter alia, K. Alter, Establishing the Supremacy of European Law. The Making of an International Rule of Law in Europe (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2001).
45. Latvia may serve as an excellent example. See A. Endzins, ‘Development of the Constitutional Court Jurisdiction in the Context of EU Membership’, Paper presented at the Congress ‘The Enlarged EU: Evaluation of the First Year’, University of Regensburg, 1–2 July 2005, on file with the author.
46. The parliamentary elections are scheduled for Sept. 2005. For a political account of Euro-sceptical parties in Poland see, inter alia, A. Szczerbiak, ‘After The Election, Nearing The Endgame: The Polish Euro-Debate In The Run Up To The 2003 EU Accession Referendum’, Sussex European Institute Working Paper No. 53.
47. See K. Wójtowicz, ‘Proposed Changes in the Polish Constitution of 1997 ahead of Poland's Accession to the European Union’, 25 PolYBIL (2001) p. 27–44
48. A. Albi, ‘“Europe” Articles in the Constitutions of Central and Eastern European Countries’, 42 CMLRev. (2005) p. 399, at p. 408.
49. See K. Inglis, CMLRev. n.16, at p. 103–106.
50. Art. 34 EU Treaty. For more on legislative procedure in the third pillar of the European Union, see E. Denza, Intergovernmental Pillars of the European Union (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2002) p. 262–264.