# C_2022084EN.01001101.xml

| 21.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 84/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Bratislava III — Slovakia) — Criminal proceedings against AB and Others

(Case C-203/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - European arrest warrant - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Scope - Article 51 - Implementation of EU law - Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA - Jurisdiction of the Court - Reference made before the issue of a European arrest warrant - Admissibility - Principle ne bis in idem - Article 50 - Concepts of ‘acquittal’ and ‘conviction’ - Amnesty in the issuing Member State - Final decision discontinuing a criminal prosecution - Revocation of the amnesty - Setting-aside of the decision discontinuing the criminal prosecution - Resumption of proceedings - Need for a decision taken after a determination of the criminal liability of the person concerned - Directive 2012/13/EU - Right to information in criminal proceedings - Scope - Concept of ‘criminal proceedings’ - Legislative procedure for the adoption of a resolution relating to the revocation of an amnesty - Judicial procedure for review of the compliance of that resolution with the national Constitution)

(2022/C 84/11)

Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Okresný súd Bratislava III

Parties in the main proceedings

AB, CD, EF, NO, JL, GH, IJ, LM, PR, ST, UV, WZ, BC, DE, FG

Intervening parties: HI, Krajská prokuratúra v Bratislave

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding the issue of a European arrest warrant against a person who was subject to a criminal prosecution that was initially discontinued by a final judicial decision adopted on the basis of an amnesty, and resumed following the adoption of a law revoking that amnesty and setting aside that judicial decision, in the case where that decision was adopted before any determination as to the criminal liability of the person concerned; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding the issue of a European arrest warrant against a person who was subject to a criminal prosecution that was initially discontinued by a final judicial decision adopted on the basis of an amnesty, and resumed following the adoption of a law revoking that amnesty and setting aside that judicial decision, in the case where that decision was adopted before any determination as to the criminal liability of the person concerned;

| 2. | Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings must be interpreted as not applying to a legislative procedure for the revocation of an amnesty or to a judicial procedure the purpose of which is to review the compliance of that revocation with the national constitution. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings must be interpreted as not applying to a legislative procedure for the revocation of an amnesty or to a judicial procedure the purpose of which is to review the compliance of that revocation with the national constitution.

---

(1)  OJ C 230, 13.7.2020.

---