EU Judgment in Case C-318/24 PPU Breian

Monday, 29 July 2024

EU Judgment in Case C-318/24 PPU Breian

(Charter of Fundamental Rights – Area of freedom, security and justice – Judicial cooperation in criminal matter – Police cooperation)

This case concerns a European arrest warrant (EAW) issued on the basis of Framework  Decision 2002/584  for the enforcement of a custodial sentence in Romania. On December 17, 2020 the Court of Appeal of Braşov, Romania, the referring court, issued a EAW against P.P.R. to enforce a prison sentence imposed on him.

On June 28, 2022, P.P.R. was arrested in Paris (France) and surrender proceedings were initiated against him. Said proceedings were terminated by a judgment of the Court of Appeal of Paris, France dated November 29, 2023. The executing judicial authority in France has refused, in a decision that has become final, to surrender the requested person (hereinafter the “sentenced person”).

According to the referring court, the Paris Court of Appeal based its refusal on the existence of a risk of breach of the fundamental right to a fair trial by an independent and impartial tribunal established in advance by law, enshrined in the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter.

The Paris Court of Appeal also considers that there are systemic or general failings in Romania with regard to the swearing in of judges, and in particular it doubts whether two of the three judges who handed down the prison sentence actually took the oath.

The Paris Court of Appeal also took into consideration the decision of deletion from Interpol’s database of the international wanted persons notice for P.P.R., on the grounds that the data concerning him did not comply with Interpol’s rules on the processing of personal data. The Paris Court of Appeal considered that this decision highlighted the existence of serious concerns about the existence of political elements in the general context and about respect for the principles of fundamental rights during the proceedings against P.P.R. in Romania.

P.P.R. was arrested in Malta pursuant to the EAW issued against him. On the same day, the Romanian court responsible for enforcing the custodial sentence referred a question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling seeking clarification of the scope of the decision rejecting the EAW.

The main issues are the effect that the res judicata effect of the refusal decision – preventing from bringing a claim once that particular claim got to a final judgment in some previous lawsuit – has on the other Member States and doubts concerning the oath.

The referring court also wondered about the scope of an Interpol decision relied on by the French executing judicial authority, and about the possibility of intervening itself in the proceedings before the executing judicial authority or, at the very least, of approaching the Commission.

In the meantime, another executing judicial authority in Malta, where the sentenced person had again been arrested, was considering whether to surrender him to Romania.

The Maltese executing judicial authority asked the referring court for further information, stating that P.P.R. had relied on the judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal.

As the Maltese court of first instance had refused to execute the EAW because of doubts about the conditions of detention in Romania, the Romanian court referred a new question to the Court.

This question concerned, on the one hand, cooperation with the Maltese court and, on the other, the level of protection of fundamental rights applied by the Maltese court.

Background Documents C-318/24