WRITTEN QUESTION P-0768/04 by Ole Sørensen (ELDR) to the Commission. Extradition of war criminals to Denmark.
Date: 2004-03-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Denmark, EU Member State, European arrest warrant, Germany, Second World War, extradition, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, national implementing measure, war crime

C 84 E/670

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Community assistance must be for the work as initially scheduled and approved. Any modification of the
project actually subsidised, whether at the level of the work itself or in relation to the objectives proposed,
has to be examined by us to ensure that the Community rules are respected. We have not so far received
any application for modification of the initial decision. If the Spanish authorities were to submit one we
would of course examine it.

It should also be borne in mind that for any project carried out within Union territory, whether given
Community financial assistance or not, the legislation in force must be respected,
including that on
environmental matters and award of public contracts.

(2004/C 84 E/0756)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0768/04

by Ole Sørensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 March 2004)

Subject: Extradition of war criminals to Denmark

The European Arrest Warrant, which entered into force on 1 January 2004, is a very welcome initiative, in
that it should not be possible for the [removal of] physical [controls at] borders between the Member
States to be exploited by criminals in order to evade punishment. This problem has increased in recent
years with the implementation of the rules on freedom of movement within the EU. To that extent the
European Arrest Warrant is a step in the right direction.

However, I am concerned about the practical implementation of the Arrest Warrant, and wish to put the
following questions to the Commission:

1. What are the Commission’s plans with regard to the seven Member States which had not introduced
the Arrest Warrant before the deadline of 31 December 2003? How many Member States have now
introduced it?

2. Can the Commission give assurances that, with the entry into force of the Arrest Warrant, it will be
possible for Denmark to extradite war criminals from Germany in respect of whom extradition has
been requested since the end of the Second World War?

3.

Is it true that the German police, referring to the Arrest Warrant, have already applied for the first
extradition of a Danish citizen to Germany on charges of fraud? Is this possible at a time when
Germany has still not yet implemented the Arrest Warrant?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 2004)

To date, ten Member States have already implemented the Framework Decision on the European

1.
Arrest Warrant (1) and have communicated their respective legislation to the Commission.

In monitoring the operation of the European Arrest Warrant, according to Article 34(3) of the Framework
Decision, the Commission shall submit a report to the Parliament and to the Council by 31 December
2004 at the latest. In this report the Commission will highlight any practical difficulties the Member States
have faced during the period of implementation and also the reasons for their non-compliance with the
time limit.

The remainder of the Member States have confirmed that they would be ready by Summer 2004. As to the
new Member States, Hungary has already passed its legislation, which comes into force on 1 May 2004,
while the others have indicated that they could be ready by the same date which is the date of accession …

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/671

The Honourable Member wonders whether the Commission can guarantee that persons who
2.
committed war crimes in World War II will be surrendered to Denmark from Germany. The Commission
draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the statements made in relation to Article 32 of the
Framework Decision.

Each Member State had the opportunity at the time of adoption by the Council of the Framework Decision
to make a statement indicating that, as executing Member State, it would continue to deal with requests
relating to acts committed before a certain date in accordance with the extradition system applicable
before 1 January 2004.

As Germany did not make such a statement, the Commission sees no obstacle preventing the Danish
authorities from issuing a European Arrest Warrant in relation to German citizens to be arrested in a
Member State that has actually implemented the Framework Decision. As soon as Germany implements it,
the European Arrest Warrant will also be executable in its territory. However, the executing judicial
authority may refuse the execution of the European Arrest Warrant on grounds of refusal in accordance
with the Framework Decision (e.g. statute-barred act).

the case
Regarding the Honourable Member’s last question,
3.
mentioned. The German judicial authorities, can not, however,
issue a European Arrest Warrant until
Germany implements the Framework Decision. The legal basis for arrest and extradition for the German
authorities still results from existing instruments relating to extradition.

the Commission is not aware of

(1) OJ L 190, 18.7.2002.

(2004/C 84 E/0757)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0770/04

by Seán Ó Neachtain (UEN) to the Commission

(5 March 2004)

Subject: EU citizenship

By 1 May 2004, a number of urgent cases relating to EU citizenship will need to have been clarified. Will
the Commission therefore state what are the EU citizenship rights after 1 May 2004 in the following two
cases: first, a lady who was born in Russia, moved to Latvia and chose to stay there without citizenship
and later married an EU citizen and moved to Ireland where she now has residency rights but requires a
visa to travel outside Ireland and, second, Latvian citizens living in Ireland or in any other EU Member
State, and their EU citizenship status?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 2004)

According to article 17 of the EC Treaty, every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a
citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall complement and not replace national citizenship.

In his first example, the Honourable Member seems to refer to the particular situation of stateless persons
in Latvia. The Commission is fully aware of this situation. A woman born in Russia and residing in Latvia
without citizenship who later marries an EU citizen and moves with him to Ireland, will only benefit from
EU citizenship rights, in her own right, if she acquires EU citizenship herself either by marriage or by any
other means laid down in the Member State’s legislation on acquisition of citizenship. If she remains
stateless or retains a third country nationality, she will still be a beneficiary of Community law on the right
of free movement and residence and is entitled to reside in Ireland by virtue of being the spouse of an EU
citizen.