# C_2022002EN.01002001.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/20

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 14 September 2021 — European arrest warrant issued against Y, Other party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie

(Case C-563/21)

(2022/C 2/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings

European arrest warrant issued against: Y

Other party to the proceedings: Openbaar Ministerie

Questions referred

| 1. | Is it appropriate to apply the test set out in the judgment in Minister for Justice and Equality (Deficiencies in the system of justice) (1) and affirmed in the judgment in Openbaar Ministerie (Independence of the issuing judicial authority), (2) where there is a real risk that the person concerned will stand trial before a court not previously established by law? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it appropriate to apply the test set out in the judgment in Minister for Justice and Equality (Deficiencies in the system of justice) (1) and affirmed in the judgment in Openbaar Ministerie (Independence of the issuing judicial authority), (2) where there is a real risk that the person concerned will stand trial before a court not previously established by law?

| 2. | Is it appropriate to apply the test set out in the judgment in Minister for Justice and Equality (Deficiencies in the system of justice) and affirmed in the judgment in Openbaar Ministerie (Independence of the issuing judicial authority) where the requested person seeking to challenge his surrender cannot meet that test by reason of the fact that it is not possible at that point in time to establish the composition of the courts before which he will be tried by reason of the manner in which cases are randomly allocated? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is it appropriate to apply the test set out in the judgment in Minister for Justice and Equality (Deficiencies in the system of justice) and affirmed in the judgment in Openbaar Ministerie (Independence of the issuing judicial authority) where the requested person seeking to challenge his surrender cannot meet that test by reason of the fact that it is not possible at that point in time to establish the composition of the courts before which he will be tried by reason of the manner in which cases are randomly allocated?

| 3. | Does the absence of an effective remedy to challenge the validity of the appointment of judges in Poland, in circumstances where it is apparent that the requested person cannot at this point in time establish that the courts before which he will be tried will be composed of judges not validly appointed, amount to a breach of the essence of the right to a fair trial, thus requiring the executing judicial authority to refuse the surrender of the requested person? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the absence of an effective remedy to challenge the validity of the appointment of judges in Poland, in circumstances where it is apparent that the requested person cannot at this point in time establish that the courts before which he will be tried will be composed of judges not validly appointed, amount to a breach of the essence of the right to a fair trial, thus requiring the executing judicial authority to refuse the surrender of the requested person?

---

(1)  Case C-216/18 PPU, ECLI:EU:C:2018:586.

(2)  Cases C-354/20 PPU and C-412/20 PPU, ECLI:EU:C:2020:1033.

---