# CE2009295EN.01012001.xml

| 4.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 295/120 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 295/120

---

Tuesday 2 September 2008Application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters *

P6_TA(2008)0381

European Parliament legislative resolution, of 2 September 2008, on the initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to adopting a Council Framework Decision on the enforcement of decisions rendered in absentia and amending Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders and Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union (5598/2008 — C6-0075/2008 — 2008/0803(CNS))

2009/C 295 E/37

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany (5598/2008),

having regard to Article 34(2)(b) of the EU Treaty,

having regard to Article 39(1) of the EU Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0075/2008),

having regard to Rules 93 and 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0285/2008),

| 1. | Approves the initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Council to amend the text accordingly; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Council to amend the text accordingly;

| 3. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

| 4. | Calls on the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany substantially; |
| --- | --- |

4.

Calls on the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany substantially;

| 5. | Calls on the Council and the Commission, following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, to give priority to any future proposal to amend the Decision in accordance with Declaration No 50 concerning Article 10 of the Protocol on transitional provisions to be annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community; |
| --- | --- |

5.

Calls on the Council and the Commission, following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, to give priority to any future proposal to amend the Decision in accordance with Declaration No 50 concerning Article 10 of the Protocol on transitional provisions to be annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community;

| 6. | Is determined to examine any such future proposal by the urgent procedure in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 5 and in close cooperation with national parliaments; |
| --- | --- |

6.

Is determined to examine any such future proposal by the urgent procedure in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 5 and in close cooperation with national parliaments;

| 7. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission, and the governments of the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany. |
| --- | --- |

7.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission, and the governments of the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany.

| TEXT PROPOSED BY SEVEN MEMBER STATES | AMENDMENTS |
| --- | --- |
| Amendment 1 |
| Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act


  Title |
| Council Framework Decision
  on the enforcement of decisions rendered in absentia
  and amending Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders,
  and
  Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union | on strengthening citizens’ rights, promoting the application of the principle of mutual recognition in respect of decisions rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person,
  and amending Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders, Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union
  , and Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the recognition and supervision of suspended sentences, alternative sanctions and conditional sentences |
| Amendment 2 |
| Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act


  Recital 1a (new) |
| | (1a) | It is necessary to strengthen mutual trust in the European area of freedom, security and justice in criminal matters by means of measures at European Union level designed to ensure greater harmonisation and mutual recognition of judgments in criminal matters and by adopting at that level some provisions and practices in criminal matters. |

TEXT PROPOSED BY SEVEN MEMBER STATES

AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Amendment 1

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Title

Title

Council Framework Decision
  on the enforcement of decisions rendered in absentia
  and amending Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders,
  and
  Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union

on the enforcement of decisions rendered in absentia

and

on strengthening citizens’ rights, promoting the application of the principle of mutual recognition in respect of decisions rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person,
  and amending Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders, Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union
  , and Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the recognition and supervision of suspended sentences, alternative sanctions and conditional sentences

on strengthening citizens’ rights, promoting the application of the principle of mutual recognition in respect of decisions rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person,

, and Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA on the recognition and supervision of suspended sentences, alternative sanctions and conditional sentences

Amendment 2

Amendment 2

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 1a (new)

Recital 1a (new)

(1a)

(1a)

It is necessary to strengthen mutual trust in the European area of freedom, security and justice in criminal matters by means of measures at European Union level designed to ensure greater harmonisation and mutual recognition of judgments in criminal matters and by adopting at that level some provisions and practices in criminal matters.

Amendment 3

Amendment 3

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 1b (new)

Recital 1b (new)

| (1b) | Adequate procedural safeguards are a necessary precondition for the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters. It is therefore important to adopt the framework decision on procedural rights in criminal proceedings as soon as possible. |
| --- | --- |

(1b)

(1b)

Adequate procedural safeguards are a necessary precondition for the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters. It is therefore important to adopt the framework decision on procedural rights in criminal proceedings as soon as possible.

Amendment 4

Amendment 4

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 4

Recital 4

| (4) | It is therefore necessary to provide clear and common solutions which define the grounds for refusal and the discretion left to the executing authority. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

It is therefore necessary to provide clear and common solutions which define the grounds for refusal and the discretion left to the executing authority.

| (4) | It is therefore necessary to provide clear and common solutions which define the grounds for refusal
  of the execution of a decision rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  and the discretion left to the executing authority.
  The purpose of this Framework Decision is to define such common grounds in order to allow the executing authority to execute a decision despite the absence of the person concerned at the trial. It is not designed to regulate the applicable forms and methods, or the procedural requirements, that are used to achieve the results specified in this Framework Decision, which are a matter for the national law of the Member States. By completing the relevant section of the European arrest warrant or of the relevant certificate under the other Framework Decisions, the issuing authority gives an assurance that the requirements have been or will be met, which should be sufficient for the purposes of the execution of a decision on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

It is therefore necessary to provide clear and common solutions which define the grounds for refusal
  of the execution of a decision rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  and the discretion left to the executing authority.
  The purpose of this Framework Decision is to define such common grounds in order to allow the executing authority to execute a decision despite the absence of the person concerned at the trial. It is not designed to regulate the applicable forms and methods, or the procedural requirements, that are used to achieve the results specified in this Framework Decision, which are a matter for the national law of the Member States. By completing the relevant section of the European arrest warrant or of the relevant certificate under the other Framework Decisions, the issuing authority gives an assurance that the requirements have been or will be met, which should be sufficient for the purposes of the execution of a decision on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition.

of the execution of a decision rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

The purpose of this Framework Decision is to define such common grounds in order to allow the executing authority to execute a decision despite the absence of the person concerned at the trial. It is not designed to regulate the applicable forms and methods, or the procedural requirements, that are used to achieve the results specified in this Framework Decision, which are a matter for the national law of the Member States. By completing the relevant section of the European arrest warrant or of the relevant certificate under the other Framework Decisions, the issuing authority gives an assurance that the requirements have been or will be met, which should be sufficient for the purposes of the execution of a decision on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition.

Amendment 5

Amendment 5

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 6

Recital 6

| (6) | Common solutions on grounds for
  refusal
  in the relevant existing Framework Decisions should take into account the diversity of situations with regard to
  informing the accused person of his right to a retrial
  . |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Common solutions on grounds for
  refusal
  in the relevant existing Framework Decisions should take into account the diversity of situations with regard to
  informing the accused person of his right to a retrial
  .

refusal

informing the accused person of his right to a retrial

| (6) | Common solutions on grounds for
  non-recognition
  in the relevant existing Framework Decisions should take into account the diversity of situations with regard to
  the right of the person concerned to a retrial or to an appeal. Such a retrial, which aims to safeguard the rights of the defence, is characterised by the following elements: the person concerned has the right to participate in the retrial; the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, will be (re)examined, and the proceedings may lead to the original decision being quashed. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Common solutions on grounds for
  non-recognition
  in the relevant existing Framework Decisions should take into account the diversity of situations with regard to
  the right of the person concerned to a retrial or to an appeal. Such a retrial, which aims to safeguard the rights of the defence, is characterised by the following elements: the person concerned has the right to participate in the retrial; the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, will be (re)examined, and the proceedings may lead to the original decision being quashed.

non-recognition

the right of the person concerned to a retrial or to an appeal. Such a retrial, which aims to safeguard the rights of the defence, is characterised by the following elements: the person concerned has the right to participate in the retrial; the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, will be (re)examined, and the proceedings may lead to the original decision being quashed.

Amendment 6

Amendment 6

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 6a (new)

Recital 6a (new)

| (6a) | The recognition and execution of a decision rendered following a trial at which the defendant did not appear in person should not be refused if, on the basis of the information provided by the issuing State, it is satisfactorily established that the defendant was summoned in person, or by other means actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial. In this context it is understood that the person should have received such information in good time, i.e. sufficiently in advance to allow him or her to participate in the trial and to effectively exercise his or her right of defence. All information should be provided in a language which the defendant understands. |
| --- | --- |

(6a)

(6a)

The recognition and execution of a decision rendered following a trial at which the defendant did not appear in person should not be refused if, on the basis of the information provided by the issuing State, it is satisfactorily established that the defendant was summoned in person, or by other means actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial. In this context it is understood that the person should have received such information in good time, i.e. sufficiently in advance to allow him or her to participate in the trial and to effectively exercise his or her right of defence. All information should be provided in a language which the defendant understands.

Amendment 7

Amendment 7

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 6b (new)

Recital 6b (new)

| (6b) | The recognition and execution of a decision following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person should not be refused where the person concerned, being aware of the scheduled trial, was defended at the trial by a legal counsellor to whom he or she had given an explicit mandate to do so, thus ensuring that the legal assistance was practical and effective. In this context, it should be immaterial whether the legal counsellor was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned, or was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, it being understood that the person concerned would have chosen to be represented by a legal counsellor instead of appearing him- or herself at the trial. |
| --- | --- |

(6b)

(6b)

The recognition and execution of a decision following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person should not be refused where the person concerned, being aware of the scheduled trial, was defended at the trial by a legal counsellor to whom he or she had given an explicit mandate to do so, thus ensuring that the legal assistance was practical and effective. In this context, it should be immaterial whether the legal counsellor was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned, or was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, it being understood that the person concerned would have chosen to be represented by a legal counsellor instead of appearing him- or herself at the trial.

Amendment 8

Amendment 8

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Recital 7a (new)

Recital 7a (new)

| (7a) | At a retrial following a conviction resulting from a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person, that person should be in the same position as someone standing trial for the first time. Therefore the person concerned should have the right to be present at the retrial, the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, should be (re)examined, the retrial could lead to the original decision being quashed and the defendant may appeal against the new decision. |
| --- | --- |

(7a)

(7a)

At a retrial following a conviction resulting from a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person, that person should be in the same position as someone standing trial for the first time. Therefore the person concerned should have the right to be present at the retrial, the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, should be (re)examined, the retrial could lead to the original decision being quashed and the defendant may appeal against the new decision.

Amendment 9

Amendment 9

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 1 — paragraph 2

Article 1 — paragraph 2

2.   This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty, and any obligations incumbent upon judicial authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.

2.   This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty
  on European Union
  , and any obligations incumbent upon judicial authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.

on European Union

Amendment 10

Amendment 10

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 1 — paragraph 3

Article 1 — paragraph 3

3.   The scope of this Framework Decision is to establish common rules for the recognition and/or execution of judicial decisions in one Member State (the executing Member State) issued by another Member State (the issuing Member State) following
  proceedings
  where the person was not present, according to the provisions in Article 5(1) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, in Article 7(2)(g) of Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA, in Article 8(2)(e) of Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA
  and
  Article 9(1)(f) of Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA.

proceedings

and

3.   The scope of this Framework Decision is to establish common rules for the recognition and/or execution of judicial decisions in one Member State (the executing Member State) issued by another Member State (the issuing Member State) following
  a trial
  where the person was not present, according to the provisions in Article 5(1) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, in Article 7(2)(g) of Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA, in Article 8(2)(e) of Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA
  ,
  Article [9(1)(f)] of Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA
  and in Article [9(1)(h)] of Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA
  .

a trial

,

[

]

and in Article [9(1)(h)] of Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Amendment 11

Amendment 11

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 1

Article 2 — point 1

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 1 — paragraph 4

Article 1 — paragraph 4

| 1) | the following paragraph shall be added to Article 1:



  4.
     
  For the purpose of this Framework Decision, ‘decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a custodial sentence or a detention order when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision. |
| --- | --- |

1)

1)

the following paragraph shall be added to Article 1:

4.
     
  For the purpose of this Framework Decision, ‘decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a custodial sentence or a detention order when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

4.

For the purpose of this Framework Decision, ‘decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a custodial sentence or a detention order when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

deleted

deleted

Amendment 12

Amendment 12

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 2

Article 2 — point 2

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 4a — title and paragraph 1

Article 4a — title and paragraph 1

Article 4a

Decisions rendered
  in absentia

in absentia

The executing judicial authority may also refuse to execute the European arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or a detention order, if the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the European arrest warrant states that the person:

in absentia

Article 4a

Decisions rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

1.
     The executing judicial authority may also refuse to execute the European arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or a detention order, if the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the European arrest warrant states that the person
  , in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  :

1.

following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

, in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State

Amendment 13

Amendment 13

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 2

Article 2 — point 2

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point a

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point a

| (a) | was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State through a competent representative and in due time
  ,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia
  and informed
  about the fact that such a
  decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State through a competent representative and in due time
  ,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia
  and informed
  about the fact that such a
  decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial;

informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State through a competent representative and in due time

of

the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia

about the fact that such a

in case the person

does

for

| (a) | in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  , |
| --- | --- |

(a)

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  ,

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood

| (i) | either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,


  and |
| --- | --- |

(i)

either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

either

directly

by other means actually received official information about

that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

and

| (ii) | was personally
  informed
  that the
  decision may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial;

  or |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

was personally
  informed
  that the
  decision may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial;

was personally

that the

if he or she

did

at

or

Amendment 14

Amendment 14

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 2

Article 2 — point 2

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point aa (new)

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point aa (new)

| (aa) | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial; |
| --- | --- |

(aa)

(aa)

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

Amendment 15

Amendment 15

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 2

Article 2 — point 2

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point b

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point b

| (b) | after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  : |
| --- | --- |

(b)

after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  :

rendered in absentia

and to be present at that trial

| (b) | after being
  personally
  served with the decision and being expressly informed
  , in a language which he or she understood,
  about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal

   (1),
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  : |
| --- | --- |

(b)

after being
  personally
  served with the decision and being expressly informed
  , in a language which he or she understood,
  about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal

   (1),
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  :

personally

, in a language which he or she understood,

or to an appeal

1

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

| (i) | expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(i)

expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  ;

does

rendered in absentia

| (i) | expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision; |
| --- | --- |

(i)

expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;

did

or

or

| (ii) | did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ;

was of at least [...] days

| (ii) | did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

or an appeal

,

shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

Amendment 16

Amendment 16

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 2

Article 2 — point 2

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point c

Article 4a — paragraph 1 — point c

| (c) | was not personally served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  but: |
| --- | --- |

(c)

was not personally served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  but:

rendered in absentia

| (c) | was not personally served with the decision but: |
| --- | --- |

(c)

was not personally served with the decision but:

| (i) | will be served with it
  at the latest on the fifth day
  after the surrender and will be expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(i)

will be served with it
  at the latest on the fifth day
  after the surrender and will be expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ;

at the latest on the fifth day

and to be present at that trial

| (i) | will be
  personally
  served with it
  immediately and in any event not later than three days
  after the surrender and will be expressly informed
  in a language which he or she understands
  about the right to a retrial
  or an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she will have the right to participate, which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(i)

will be
  personally
  served with it
  immediately and in any event not later than three days
  after the surrender and will be expressly informed
  in a language which he or she understands
  about the right to a retrial
  or an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she will have the right to participate, which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed
  ;

personally

immediately and in any event not later than three days

in a language which he or she understands

or an appeal

in which he or she will have the right to participate, which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed

and

and

| (ii) | will have
  at least [...] days
  to request a retrial. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

will have
  at least [...] days
  to request a retrial.

at least [...] days

| (ii) | will
  be informed about the timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days, within which he or she must
  request
  such
  a retrial
  or appeal
  ; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

will
  be informed about the timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days, within which he or she must
  request
  such
  a retrial
  or appeal
  ;

be informed about the timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days, within which he or she must

such

or appeal

Amendment 17

Amendment 17

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 2

Article 2 — point 2

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Article 4a — paragraph 1a (new)

Article 4a — paragraph 1a (new)

1a.
     
  If a European arrest warrant is issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or detention order under the conditions set out in paragraph (1)(c) and the person concerned has not previously received any official information about the existence of the criminal proceedings against him or her, that person, when he or she is informed about the content of the European arrest warrant, may request a copy of the judgment before being surrendered. Immediately after having been informed of that request, the issuing judicial authority shall provide a copy of the judgment via the executing judicial authority to the person who made the request. If the judgment is rendered in a language which the person concerned does not understand, the issuing judicial authority via the executing judicial authority shall provide an extract from the judgment in a language which the person concerned understands. The provision of the judgment or an extract from the judgment to the person concerned shall be for information purposes only; it shall not be construed as constituting formal service of the judgment nor shall it activate any time-limits applicable for requesting a retrial or appeal.

1a.

If a European arrest warrant is issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or detention order under the conditions set out in paragraph (1)(c) and the person concerned has not previously received any official information about the existence of the criminal proceedings against him or her, that person, when he or she is informed about the content of the European arrest warrant, may request a copy of the judgment before being surrendered. Immediately after having been informed of that request, the issuing judicial authority shall provide a copy of the judgment via the executing judicial authority to the person who made the request. If the judgment is rendered in a language which the person concerned does not understand, the issuing judicial authority via the executing judicial authority shall provide an extract from the judgment in a language which the person concerned understands. The provision of the judgment or an extract from the judgment to the person concerned shall be for information purposes only; it shall not be construed as constituting formal service of the judgment nor shall it activate any time-limits applicable for requesting a retrial or appeal.

Amendment 18

Amendment 18

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 4

Article 2 — point 4

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Annex — box d — introductory part and points 1 and 2

Annex — box d — introductory part and points 1 and 2

| (d) | Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  : |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  :

decision was rendered in absentia

| (d) | Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision
  : |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision
  :

person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision

| 1. |  
  No, it was not |
| --- | --- |

1.

 
  No, it was not

No, it was not

| 1. |  
  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision. |
| --- | --- |

1.

 
  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

| 2. |  
  Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that: |
| --- | --- |

2.

 
  Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that:

Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that:

| 2. |  
  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial resulting in the decision.




  If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if: |
| --- | --- |

2.

 
  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

No, the person did not appear in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

Amendment 19

Amendment 19

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 4

Article 2 — point 4

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.1

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.1

| 2.1. | the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and in due time
  , of the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and informed
  about the
  fact that
  such
  a decision may be handed down in case the person does not appear for the trial |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and in due time
  , of the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and informed
  about the
  fact that
  such
  a decision may be handed down in case the person does not appear for the trial

informed

through a competent representative and in due time

hearing

rendered in absentia

about the

such

in case the person does

for

| 2.1. | the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information in due time, in a language which he /she understood,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State, about the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the decision
  in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information in due time, in a language which he /she understood,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State, about the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the decision
  in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial

directly

by other means actually received official information in due time, in a language which he /she understood,

trial

in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial

was personally

if he or she did

at

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  otherwise informed
  :

otherwise informed

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  received in person the official information by other means
  :

received in person the official information by other means

...

...

Language in which the information was delivered
  :

Language in which the information was delivered

...

Describe how the person was informed:

Describe how the person was informed:

...

...

Amendment 20

Amendment 20

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 4

Article 2 — point 4

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.1a (new)

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.1a (new)

| 2.1a. | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;



  Provide information on how this condition was met:


  ... |
| --- | --- |

2.1a.

2.1a.

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

Provide information on how this condition was met:

Provide information on how this condition was met:

...

Amendment 21

Amendment 21

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 4

Article 2 — point 4

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.2

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.2

| 2.2. | the person, after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

the person, after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia

rendered in absentia

does

rendered in absentia

| 2.2. | the person, after being personally served with the decision
  and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

the person, after being personally served with the decision
  and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision

and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,

did

Describe when and how the person expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  :

does

rendered in absentia

Describe
  when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or an appeal and
  when and how the person expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision:

when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or an appeal and

did

...

...

Amendment 22

Amendment 22

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 4

Article 2 — point 4

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.3.1 — indent 1

Annex — box d — point 2 — subpoint 2.3.1 — indent 1

| — | the person was expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial;
  and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial;
  and

and to be present at that trial;

| — | the person was expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and

in a language which he or she understood

or an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,

Amendment 23

Amendment 23

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 2 — point 4

Article 2 — point 4

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA

Annex — box d — point 2.3.2

Annex — box d — point 2.3.2

|  | 2.3.2. the person was not served with the decision
  rendered in absentia,
  and |
| --- | --- |



2.3.2. the person was not served with the decision
  rendered in absentia,
  and

rendered in absentia,

|  | 2.3.2. the person was not served with the decision and |
| --- | --- |



2.3.2. the person was not served with the decision and

| — | the person will be served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  within ... days after the surrender; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person will be served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  within ... days after the surrender; and

rendered in absentia

| — | the person will be
  personally
  served with the decision within ... days after the surrender; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person will be
  personally
  served with the decision within ... days after the surrender; and

personally

| — | when served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , the person will be expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and |
| --- | --- |

—

when served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , the person will be expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and

rendered in absentia

and to be present at that trial

| — | when served with the decision, the person will be expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understands,
  about the right to a retrial
  or an appeal, in which he or she will have the right to participate, which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed
  ; and |
| --- | --- |

—

when served with the decision, the person will be expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understands,
  about the right to a retrial
  or an appeal, in which he or she will have the right to participate, which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed
  ; and

in a language which he or she understands,

or an appeal, in which he or she will have the right to participate, which will allow the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, to be (re)examined and which may lead to the original decision being quashed

| — | after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , the person will have ... days to request a retrial. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , the person will have ... days to request a retrial.

rendered in absentia

| — | after being served with the decision, the person will have ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  . |
| --- | --- |

—

after being served with the decision, the person will have ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  .

or an appeal

If you ticked box 2.3.2, please confirm

If you ticked box 2.3.2, please confirm

|  | that if the person concerned, when being informed in the executing State about the content of the European arrest warrant, requests a copy of the judgment before being surrendered, he or she will be provided with a copy of the judgment or with an extract from the judgment in a language which he or she understands ... days after the request is made via the executing judicial authority. |
| --- | --- |



that if the person concerned, when being informed in the executing State about the content of the European arrest warrant, requests a copy of the judgment before being surrendered, he or she will be provided with a copy of the judgment or with an extract from the judgment in a language which he or she understands ... days after the request is made via the executing judicial authority.

Amendment 24

Amendment 24

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 1

Article 3 — point 1

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 1 — point e

Article 1 — point e

| 1) | the following point shall be added to Article 1:









  (e) | ‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a decision as defined in (a) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision. |
| --- | --- | --- |

1)

1)

the following point shall be added to Article 1:

(e)

(e)

‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a decision as defined in (a) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a decision as defined in (a) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

deleted

deleted

Amendment 25

Amendment 25

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — introductory part

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — introductory part

| (i) | according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the certificate states that the person: |
| --- | --- |

(i)

according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the certificate states that the person:

in absentia

| (i) | according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the certificate states that the person
  , in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  : |
| --- | --- |

(i)

according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the certificate states that the person
  , in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  :

following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

, in accordance with the national law of the issuing State

Amendment 26

Amendment 26

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint i

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint i

| (i) | in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  , |
| --- | --- |

(i)

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  ,

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood

| (i) | was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia |
| --- | --- |

(i)

was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia

informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of

the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia

| (a) | either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, |
| --- | --- |

(a)

(a)

either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

either

directly

by other means actually received official information about

that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

and

and

informed
  about the fact that such a
  decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial;

about the fact that such a

in case the person

does

for

| (b) | was personally
  informed
  that the
  decision may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

was personally
  informed
  that the
  decision may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial;

was personally

that the

if he or she

did

at

or

or

Amendment 27

Amendment 27

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint ia (new)

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint ia (new)

| (ia) | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial; or |
| --- | --- |

(ia)

(ia)

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial; or

Amendment 28

Amendment 28

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint ii

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint ii

| (ii) | expressly stated to a competent authority that he or she does not contest the case; or |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

expressly stated to a competent authority that he or she does not contest the case; or

deleted

deleted

Amendment 29

Amendment 29

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint iii

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point i — subpoint iii

| (iii) | after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  : |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  :

rendered in absentia

and to be present at that trial

| (iii) | after being
  personally
  served with the decision and being expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  : |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

after being
  personally
  served with the decision and being expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  :

personally

in a language which he or she understood

or to an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

| — | expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  ; |
| --- | --- |

—

expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  ;

does

rendered in absentia

| — | expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;

did

or

or

| — | did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ; |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ;

was of at least [...] days

| — | did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days
  ; |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days
  ;

or an appeal

,

shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days

Amendment 30

Amendment 30

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Article 3 — point 2 — subpoint b

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point ia (new)

Article 7 — paragraph 2 — point ia (new)

| (ia) | according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the person did not appear in person, unless the certificate states that the person, having been expressly informed about the proceedings and the possibility of participating in person in the trial, expressly waived the right to an oral hearing and expressly indicated that he or she did not contest the case. |
| --- | --- |

(ia)

(ia)

according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the person did not appear in person, unless the certificate states that the person, having been expressly informed about the proceedings and the possibility of participating in person in the trial, expressly waived the right to an oral hearing and expressly indicated that he or she did not contest the case.

Amendment 31

Amendment 31

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 3

Article 3 — point 3

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Annex — box h — point 3 — introductory part and subpoints 1 and 2

Annex — box h — point 3 — introductory part and subpoints 1 and 2

| 3. | Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  : |
| --- | --- |

3.

Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  :

decision was rendered in absentia

| 3. | Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision
  : |
| --- | --- |

3.

Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision
  :

person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision

| 1. |  
  No, it was not |
| --- | --- |

1.

 
  No, it was not

No, it was not

| 1. |  
  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision. |
| --- | --- |

1.

 
  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision.

Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision.

| 2. |  
  Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that: |
| --- | --- |

2.

 
  Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that:

Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that:

| 2. |  
  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the decision. |
| --- | --- |

2.

 
  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the decision.

No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the decision.

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

Amendment 32

Amendment 32

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 3

Article 3 — point 3

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.1

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.1

| 2.1. | the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and
  in due time,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and informed about the fact that such a decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and
  in due time,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and informed about the fact that such a decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial

informed

Member

through a competent representative and

of

hearing

rendered in absentia

in case the person

does

for

| 2.1. | the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State,
  official information
  in due time
  and in a language which he or she understood, about
  the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the decision
  in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that such a decision may be handed
  down if he or she

  did not appear at the trial |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State,
  official information
  in due time
  and in a language which he or she understood, about
  the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the decision
  in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that such a decision may be handed
  down if he or she

  did not appear at the trial

directly

by other means actually received,

official information

and in a language which he or she understood, about

trial

in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial

was personally

down if he or she

did

at

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  otherwise informed
  :

otherwise informed

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  by other means received the official information in person
  :

by other means received the official information in person

...

...

Language in which the information was delivered
  :

Language in which the information was delivered

...

Describe how the person was informed:

Describe how the person was informed:

...

...

OR

OR

Amendment 33

Amendment 33

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 3

Article 3 — point 3

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.1a (new)

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.1a (new)

| 2.1a. | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;



  Provide information on how this condition was met
  :
  ...


  OR |
| --- | --- |

2.1a.

2.1a.

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

Provide information on how this condition was met
  :

Provide information on how this condition was met

...

OR

OR

Amendment 34

Amendment 34

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 3

Article 3 — point 3

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.2

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.2

| 2.2. | the person, before or after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  . |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

the person, before or after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  .

rendered in absentia

does

rendered in absentia

| 2.2. | the person, before or after being
  personally
  served with the decision
  and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, of the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

the person, before or after being
  personally
  served with the decision
  and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, of the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision.

personally

and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, of the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,

did

Describe when and how the person expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  :

does

rendered in absentia

Describe
  when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed of his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and
  when and how the person expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision:

when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed of his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and

did

...

...

OR

OR

Amendment 35

Amendment 35

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 3

Article 3 — point 3

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.3

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.3

|  | 2.3. the person was served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial in the issuing State under the following conditions: |
| --- | --- |



2.3. the person was served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial in the issuing State under the following conditions:

rendered in absentia

|  | 2.3. the person was
  personally
  served with the decision
  following a trial at which he or she did not appear in person
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  in the issuing State under the following conditions: |
| --- | --- |



2.3. the person was
  personally
  served with the decision
  following a trial at which he or she did not appear in person
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  in the issuing State under the following conditions:

personally

following a trial at which he or she did not appear in person

or to an appeal

| — | the person was expressly informed
  about
  the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed
  about
  the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and

about

and to be present at that trial

| — | the person was expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  ,
  of
  the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  ,
  of
  the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and

in a language which he or she understood

of

or to an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,

| — | after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial and he or she did not request it during this period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial and he or she did not request it during this period.

this

| — | after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  and he or she did not request it during that period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  and he or she did not request it during that period.

or an appeal

that

OR

OR

Amendment 36

Amendment 36

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 3 — point 3

Article 3 — point 3

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.3a (new)

Annex — box h — point 3 — subpoint 2.3a (new)

| 2.3a. | the person, having been expressly informed of the proceedings and the possibility of participating in person in the trial, expressly waived the right to an oral hearing and expressly indicated that he or she did not contest the case.



  Describe when and how the person waived the right to an oral hearing and indicated that he or she did not contest the case:


  ... |
| --- | --- |

2.3a.

2.3a.

the person, having been expressly informed of the proceedings and the possibility of participating in person in the trial, expressly waived the right to an oral hearing and expressly indicated that he or she did not contest the case.

Describe when and how the person waived the right to an oral hearing and indicated that he or she did not contest the case:

Describe when and how the person waived the right to an oral hearing and indicated that he or she did not contest the case:

...

Amendment 37

Amendment 37

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 1

Article 4 — point 1

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Article 2 — point i

Article 2 — point i

| (1) | the following point shall be added to Article 2:









  (i) | ‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a confiscation order as defined in (c) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

(1)

the following point shall be added to Article 2:

(i)

(i)

‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a confiscation order as defined in (c) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a confiscation order as defined in (c) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

deleted

deleted

Amendment 38

Amendment 38

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 2

Article 4 — point 2

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — introductory part

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — introductory part

| (e) | according to the certificate provided for in Article 4(2), the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the certificate states that the person: |
| --- | --- |

(e)

according to the certificate provided for in Article 4(2), the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the certificate states that the person:

in absentia

| (e) | according to the certificate provided for in Article 4(2), the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the certificate states that the person,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  : |
| --- | --- |

(e)

according to the certificate provided for in Article 4(2), the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the certificate states that the person,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  :

following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

in accordance with the national law of the issuing State

Amendment 39

Amendment 39

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 2

Article 4 — point 2

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — subpoint i

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — subpoint i

| (i) | in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  , |
| --- | --- |

(i)

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  ,

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood

| (i) | was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the confiscation order rendered in absentia |
| --- | --- |

(i)

was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the confiscation order rendered in absentia

informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of

the hearing which led to the confiscation order rendered in absentia

| (a) | either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, |
| --- | --- |

(a)

(a)

either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

either

directly

by other means actually received official information about

that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

and

and

informed
  about the fact that such a
  confiscation order may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial;

about the fact that such a

in case the person

does

for

| (b) | was personally
  informed
  that a
  confiscation order may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

was personally
  informed
  that a
  confiscation order may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial;

was personally

that a

if he or she

did

at

or

or

Amendment 40

Amendment 40

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 2

Article 4 — point 2

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — subpoint ia (new)

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — subpoint ia (new)

| (ia) | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;



  or |
| --- | --- |

(ia)

(ia)

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

or

or

Amendment 41

Amendment 41

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 2

Article 4 — point 2

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — subpoint ii

Article 8 — paragraph 2 — point e — subpoint ii

| (ii) | after being served with the confiscation order
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed
  about
  the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  : |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

after being served with the confiscation order
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed
  about
  the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  :

rendered in absentia

about

and to be present at that trial

| (ii) | after being
  personally
  served with the confiscation order and being expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  ,
  of
  the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  : |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

after being
  personally
  served with the confiscation order and being expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  ,
  of
  the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  :

personally

in a language which he or she understood

of

or to an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

| — | expressly stated that he or she does not contest the confiscation order; |
| --- | --- |

—

expressly stated that he or she does not contest the confiscation order;

does

| — | expressly stated that he or she did not contest the confiscation order; |
| --- | --- |

—

expressly stated that he or she did not contest the confiscation order;

did

or

or

| — | did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ; |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ;

was of at least [...] days

| — | did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days. |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

or an appeal

,

shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

Amendment 42

Amendment 42

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 3

Article 4 — point 3

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Annex — box j — introductory part and points 1 and 2

Annex — box j — introductory part and points 1 and 2

| (j) | Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  : |
| --- | --- |

(j)

Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  :

decision was rendered in absentia

| (j) | Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order
  : |
| --- | --- |

(j)

Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order
  :

person appeared in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order

| 1. |  No, it was not |
| --- | --- |

1.

 No, it was not

| 1. |  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order. |
| --- | --- |

1.

 Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order.

| 2. |  Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that: |
| --- | --- |

2.

 Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that:

| 2. |  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order. |
| --- | --- |

2.

 No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the confiscation order.

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

Amendment 43

Amendment 43

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 3

Article 4 — point 3

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.1

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.1

| 2.1. | the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and in due time
  ,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the
  decision rendered in absentia
  and informed about the fact that such a decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and in due time
  ,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the
  decision rendered in absentia
  and informed about the fact that such a decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial

informed

Member

through a competent representative and in due time

of

hearing

decision rendered in absentia

in case the person

does

for

| 2.1. | the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information in due time,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  and in a language which he or she understood
  ,
  about
  the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the
  confiscation order, in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that such a decision may be handed
  down if he or she

  did not appear at the trial |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information in due time,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  and in a language which he or she understood
  ,
  about
  the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the
  confiscation order, in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that such a decision may be handed
  down if he or she

  did not appear at the trial

directly

by other means actually received official information in due time,

and in a language which he or she understood

about

trial

confiscation order, in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial

was personally

down if he or she

did

at

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  otherwise informed
  :

otherwise informed

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  received the official information in person by other means
  :

received the official information in person by other means

...

...

Language in which the information was delivered
  :

Language in which the information was delivered

...

Describe how the person was informed:

Describe how the person was informed:

...

...

OR

OR

Amendment 44

Amendment 44

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 3

Article 4 — point 3

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.1a (new)

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.1a (new)

| 2.1a. | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;



  Provide information on how this condition was met:


  ...


  OR |
| --- | --- |

2.1a.

2.1a.

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

Provide information on how this condition was met:

Provide information on how this condition was met:

...

OR

OR

Amendment 45

Amendment 45

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 3

Article 4 — point 3

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.2

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.2

| 2.2. | the person, after being served with the
  decision rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest
  the decision rendered in absentia
  . |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

the person, after being served with the
  decision rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest
  the decision rendered in absentia
  .

decision rendered in absentia

the decision rendered in absentia

| 2.2. | the person, after being
  personally
  served with the
  confiscation order and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  , expressly stated that he or she did not contest
  the order. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

the person, after being
  personally
  served with the
  confiscation order and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  , expressly stated that he or she did not contest
  the order.

personally

confiscation order and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

did

the order.

Describe when and how the person expressly stated that he or she does not contest the
  decision rendered in absentia
  :

does

decision rendered in absentia

Describe
  when the person was served with the confiscation order, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and
  when and how the person expressly stated that he or she did not contest the
  confiscation order:

when the person was served with the confiscation order, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and

did

confiscation order:

...

...

OR

OR

Amendment 46

Amendment 46

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 4 — point 3

Article 4 — point 3

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.3

Annex — box j — point 2 — subpoint 2.3

|  | 2.3. the person was served with the
  decision rendered in absentia
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial in the issuing State under the following conditions: |
| --- | --- |



2.3. the person was served with the
  decision rendered in absentia
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial in the issuing State under the following conditions:

decision rendered in absentia

|  | 2.3. the person was
  personally
  served with the
  confiscation order
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the issuing State under the following conditions: |
| --- | --- |



2.3. the person was
  personally
  served with the
  confiscation order
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the issuing State under the following conditions:

personally

confiscation order

or an appeal

| — | the person was expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and

and to be present at that trial

| — | the person was expressly informed
  , in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed
  , in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and

, in a language which he or she understood

or to an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,

| — | after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial and he or she did not request it during this period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial and he or she did not request it during this period.

this

this

| — | after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  and he or she did not request it during that period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  and he or she did not request it during that period.

that

or an appeal

that

Amendment 47

Amendment 47

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 1

Article 5 — point 1

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Article 1 — point e

Article 1 — point e

| (1) | the following point shall be added to Article 1:









  (e) | ‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a decision as defined in (a) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(1)

(1)

the following point shall be added to Article 1:

(e)

(e)

‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a decision as defined in (a) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

‘Decision rendered in absentia’ shall mean a decision as defined in (a) when the person did not personally appear in the proceedings resulting in that decision.

deleted

deleted

Amendment 48

Amendment 48

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 2

Article 5 — point 2

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f

| (f) | according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the certificate states that the person: |
| --- | --- |

(f)

according to the certificate provided for in Article 4, the decision was rendered
  in absentia
  , unless the certificate states that the person:

in absentia

| (f) | according to the certificate provided for in Article [4], the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the certificate states that the person
  , in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  : |
| --- | --- |

(f)

according to the certificate provided for in Article [4], the decision was rendered
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  , unless the certificate states that the person
  , in accordance with the national law of the issuing State
  :

[

]

following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

, in accordance with the national law of the issuing State

Amendment 49

Amendment 49

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 2

Article 5 — point 2

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f — subpoint i

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f — subpoint i

| (i) | in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  , |
| --- | --- |

(i)

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood
  ,

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood

| (i) | was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia |
| --- | --- |

(i)

was summoned in person or
  informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of
  the scheduled date and place of
  the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia

informed in accordance with the national law of the issuing State through a competent representative and in due time, of

the hearing which led to the decision rendered in absentia

| (a) | either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, |
| --- | --- |

(a)

(a)

either
  was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information about
  the scheduled date and place of
  that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

either

directly

by other means actually received official information about

that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

and

and

informed
  about the fact that such a
  decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial;

about the fact that such a

in case the person

does

for

| (b) | was personally
  informed
  that a
  decision may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

(b)

was personally
  informed
  that a
  decision may be handed down
  if he or she

  did not appear at the trial;

was personally

that a

if he or she

did

at

or

or

Amendment 50

Amendment 50

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 2

Article 5 — point 2

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f — subpoint ia (new)

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f — subpoint ia (new)

| (ia) | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;



  or |
| --- | --- |

(ia)

(ia)

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

or

or

Amendment 51

Amendment 51

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 2

Article 5 — point 2

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f — subpoint ii

Article 9 — paragraph 1 — point f — subpoint ii

| (ii) | after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  : |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and being expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  :

rendered in absentia

and to be present at that trial

| (ii) | after being
  personally
  served with the decision and being expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  : |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

after being
  personally
  served with the decision and being expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  :

personally

in a language which he or she understood

or to an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

| — | expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  ; |
| --- | --- |

—

expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  ;

does

rendered in absentia

| — | expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;

did

or

or

| — | did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ; |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial in the applicable timeframe which
  was of at least [...] days
  ;

was of at least [...] days

| — | did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days. |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial
  or an appeal
  in the applicable timeframe
  ,
  which
  shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

or an appeal

,

shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

Amendment 52

Amendment 52

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 3

Article 5 — point 3

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Annex — box k — point 1 — introductory part and subpoints a and b

Annex — box k — point 1 — introductory part and subpoints a and b

| 1. | Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  : |
| --- | --- |

1.

Indicate if the
  decision was rendered in absentia
  :

decision was rendered in absentia

| 1. | Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision
  : |
| --- | --- |

1.

Indicate if the
  person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision
  :

person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision

| a. |  No, it was not |
| --- | --- |

a.

 No, it was not

| a. |  Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision. |
| --- | --- |

a.

 Yes, the person appeared in person at the trial which led to the decision.

| b. |  Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that: |
| --- | --- |

b.

 Yes, it was. If you have answered yes, please confirm that:

| b. |  No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the decision. |
| --- | --- |

b.

 No, the person did not appear in person at the trial which led to the decision.

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

Amendment 53

Amendment 53

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 3

Article 5 — point 3

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.1

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.1

|  | b.1. the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and in due time
  ,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and informed
  about the fact
  that
  such
  a decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial |
| --- | --- |



b.1. the person was summoned in person or
  informed
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing Member State
  through a competent representative and in due time
  ,
  of
  the scheduled date and place of the
  hearing
  which led to the decision
  rendered in absentia
  and informed
  about the fact
  that
  such
  a decision may be handed down
  in case the person

  does not appear for the trial

informed

Member

through a competent representative and in due time

of

hearing

rendered in absentia

about the fact

such

in case the person

does

for

|  | b.1. the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information in due time and in a language which he or she understood,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State,
  about
  the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the decision
  in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that a decision may be handed
  down if he or she

  did not appear at the trial |
| --- | --- |



b.1. the person was
  directly
  summoned in person or
  by other means actually received official information in due time and in a language which he or she understood,
  in accordance with the national law of the issuing State,
  about
  the scheduled date and place of the
  trial
  which led to the decision
  in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial
  and
  was personally
  informed that a decision may be handed
  down if he or she

  did not appear at the trial

directly

by other means actually received official information in due time and in a language which he or she understood,

about

trial

in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial

was personally

down if he or she

did

at

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  otherwise informed
  :

otherwise informed

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or
  received the official information in person by other means
  :

received the official information in person by other means

...

...

Language in which the information was delivered
  :

Language in which the information was delivered

...

Describe how the person was informed:

Describe how the person was informed:

...

...

OR

OR

Amendment 54

Amendment 54

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 3

Article 5 — point 3

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.1a (new)

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.1a (new)

|  | b.1a. after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;



  Provide information on how this condition was met:


  ...


  OR |
| --- | --- |



b.1a. after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

Provide information on how this condition was met:

Provide information on how this condition was met:

...

OR

OR

Amendment 55

Amendment 55

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 3

Article 5 — point 3

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.2

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.2

|  | b.2. the person, after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  . |
| --- | --- |



b.2. the person, after being served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  , expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  .

rendered in absentia

does

rendered in absentia

|  | b.2. the person, after being
  personally
  served with the decision
  and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  , expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision. |
| --- | --- |



b.2. the person, after being
  personally
  served with the decision
  and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  , expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision.

personally

and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

did

Describe when and how the person expressly stated that he or she does not contest the decision
  rendered in absentia
  :

does

rendered in absentia

Describe
  when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and
  when and how the person expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision:

when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and

did

...

...

OR

OR

Amendment 56

Amendment 56

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5 — point 3

Article 5 — point 3

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.3

Annex — box k — point 1 — subpoint b.3

|  | b.3. the person was served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial in the issuing State under the following conditions: |
| --- | --- |



b.3. the person was served with the decision
  rendered in absentia
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial in the issuing State under the following conditions:

rendered in absentia

|  | b.3. the person was
  personally
  served with the decision
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  in the issuing State under the following conditions: |
| --- | --- |



b.3. the person was
  personally
  served with the decision
  following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person
  on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  in the issuing State under the following conditions:

personally

following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person

or to an appeal

| — | the person was expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed about the right to a retrial
  and to be present at that trial
  ; and

and to be present at that trial

| — | the person was expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and |
| --- | --- |

—

the person was expressly informed,
  in a language which he or she understood
  , about the right to a retrial
  or to an appeal
  ,
  in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,
  and

in a language which he or she understood

or to an appeal

in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed,

| — | after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial and he or she did not request it during this period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of this right, the person had ... days to request a retrial and he or she did not request it during this period.

this

this

| — | after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  and he or she did not make such a request during that period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial
  or an appeal
  and he or she did not make such a request during that period.

that

or an appeal

make such a

that

Amendment 57

Amendment 57

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Initiative by the Republic of Slovenia, the French Republic, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden, the Slovak Republic, the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany — amending act

Article 5a (new)

Article 5a (new)

Article 5a

Article 5a

Amendments to Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Amendments to Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA is hereby amended as follows:

Framework Decision 2008/.../JHA is hereby amended as follows:

| 1) | in Article [9(1)], point [h] shall be replaced by the following:










  (h) | according to the certificate provided for in Article [6], the decision was rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person, unless the certificate states that the person, in accordance with the national law of the issuing State:










  (i) | in due time, and in a language which he or she understood,








  — | either was directly summoned in person or by other means actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,




  and |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |

1)

1)

in Article [9(1)], point [h] shall be replaced by the following:

in Article [9(1)], point [h] shall be replaced by the following:

(h)

(h)

according to the certificate provided for in Article [6], the decision was rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person, unless the certificate states that the person, in accordance with the national law of the issuing State:

according to the certificate provided for in Article [6], the decision was rendered following a trial at which the person concerned did not appear in person, unless the certificate states that the person, in accordance with the national law of the issuing State:

(i)

(i)

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood,

in due time, and in a language which he or she understood,

—

either was directly summoned in person or by other means actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

either was directly summoned in person or by other means actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial,

and

and

| — | was personally informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial;




  or |
| --- | --- |

—

was personally informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial;

was personally informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial;

or

or

| (ii) | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial; or |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial; or

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial; or

| (iii) | after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  :






  — | expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;




  or |
| --- | --- | --- |

(iii)

(iii)

after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed
  :

after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed

—

expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;

expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision;

or

or

| — | did not request a retrial or an appeal in the applicable timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days. |
| --- | --- |

—

did not request a retrial or an appeal in the applicable timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

did not request a retrial or an appeal in the applicable timeframe, which shall be a minimum of 10 days and a maximum of 15 days.

| 2) | In box [(i)] of the Annex (‘Certificate’), point [1] shall be replaced by the following:









  1. | Indicate if the person

  appeared in person

  at the trial resulting in the decision:








   | Yes, the person appeared

  in person at the trial resulting in the decision. |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2)

2)

In box [(i)] of the Annex (‘Certificate’), point [1] shall be replaced by the following:

In box [(i)] of the Annex (‘Certificate’), point [1] shall be replaced by the following:

1.

1.

Indicate if the person

  appeared in person

  at the trial resulting in the decision:

Indicate if the person

appeared in person

at the trial resulting in the decision:



Yes, the person appeared

  in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

Yes, the person appeared

in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

|  | No, the person did not appear

  in person at the trial resulting in the decision. |
| --- | --- |



No, the person did not appear

  in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

No, the person did not appear

in person at the trial resulting in the decision.

If you answered ‘no’ to this question, please indicate if:

| (i) | the person was directly summoned in person or in accordance with the national law of the issuing State by other means actually received official information, in due time and in a language which he or she understood, about the scheduled date and place of the trial which led to the decision in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial and was personally informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial



  Time and place when and where the person was summoned or received the official information in person by other means:

  ...


  Language in which the information was delivered
  :
  ...

  Describe how the person was informed:

  ...

  OR |
| --- | --- |

(i)

(i)

the person was directly summoned in person or in accordance with the national law of the issuing State by other means actually received official information, in due time and in a language which he or she understood, about the scheduled date and place of the trial which led to the decision in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial and was personally informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial

the person was directly summoned in person or in accordance with the national law of the issuing State by other means actually received official information, in due time and in a language which he or she understood, about the scheduled date and place of the trial which led to the decision in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that the person concerned was aware of the scheduled date and place of the trial and was personally informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she did not appear at the trial

Time and place when and where the person was summoned or received the official information in person by other means:

...

Language in which the information was delivered
  :

Language in which the information was delivered

...

Describe how the person was informed:

...

OR

| (ii) | after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;




  Provide information on how this condition was met
  :
  ...

  OR |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

(ii)

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

after having been directly summoned in person or by other means having actually received official information about the scheduled date and place of the trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the trial, had given an explicit mandate to a legal counsellor who was chosen, appointed and paid by the person concerned or who was appointed and paid by the State in accordance with its national law applicable to the rights of the defence, and was indeed defended by that counsellor during the trial;

Provide information on how this condition was met
  :

Provide information on how this condition was met

...

OR

| (iii) | the person, after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed, expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision.



  Describe when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and when and how the person expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision:

  ...

  OR |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

(iii)

the person, after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed, expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision.

the person, after being personally served with the decision and being expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed, expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision.

Describe when the person was served with the decision, how he or she was informed about his/her right to a retrial or to an appeal and when and how the person expressly stated that he or she did not contest the decision:

...

OR

| (iv) | the person was personally served with the decision following a trial at which he or she did not appear in person on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial or to an appeal in the issuing State under the following conditions:








  — | the person was expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed, and |
| --- | --- | --- |

(iv)

(iv)

the person was personally served with the decision following a trial at which he or she did not appear in person on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial or to an appeal in the issuing State under the following conditions:

the person was personally served with the decision following a trial at which he or she did not appear in person on ... (day/month/year) and was entitled to a retrial or to an appeal in the issuing State under the following conditions:

—

the person was expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed, and

the person was expressly informed, in a language which he or she understood, about the right to a retrial or to an appeal, in which he or she would have the right to participate, at which the merits of the case, including fresh evidence, would be (re)examined and which could lead to the original decision being quashed, and

| — | after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial or an appeal and he or she did not make such a request during that period. |
| --- | --- |

—

after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial or an appeal and he or she did not make such a request during that period.

after being informed of that right, the person had ... days to request a retrial or an appeal and he or she did not make such a request during that period.

---

(1)  This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout (each time there is a reference to a retrial the expression ‘or an appeal’ should be added.)

1

This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout (each time there is a reference to a retrial the expression ‘or an appeal’ should be added.)

---