CELEX: 62020CA0203
Language: en
Date: 2021-12-16 00:00:00
Title: Case C-203/20: 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 (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)

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;
               
            
                  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.