Extradition to Poland may take place on the basis of a European arrest warrant. Germany and Poland, as neighbouring countries, have an active extradition traffic in both directions, with the international press in particular complaining that Poland has often used the European arrest warrant for petty offences. That's in line with my experience.

German nationals may also be extradited to Poland for prosecution on the basis of a European arrest warrant.

European arrest warrant from Poland

The European arrest warrant shall be transmitted directly between the competent judicial authorities of both States.

In Poland, arrest warrants are issued by the local courts during the investigation procedure. The issuing of an arrest warrant presupposes a considerable suspicion of the crime and the risk of collusion or flight. In connection with the risk of flight, Polish colleagues tell me that the risk of flight is already regularly stated if the defendant is not resident in Poland. Pre-trial detention is no longer admissible if there are good grounds for believing that the sentence to be expected will not exceed pre-trial detention or if it can be expected that the sentence will be suspended for probation.

In addition to the annulment of the arrest warrant, Polish criminal procedure law also provides for the suspension of execution, including on bail. In addition, there are conditions in connection with the exemption from detention, such as police reporting obligations, temporary operating prohibitions or the prohibition to leave the country. Polish law has a differentiated system of appeals against an arrest warrant, some of which are time-bound. Even if you are abroad, you can appeal against the arrest warrant, which can become important during extradition proceedings.

German case-law on extradition to Poland

Higher Regional Court Frankfurt a.M. (Decision of 10.05.2016 - 2 Ausl A 202/15) on extradition to Poland, in particular on the significance of the habitual residence of a foreigner in Germany.

German Federal Constitutional Court (decision of 15.06.2016 - 2 BvR 468/16) on extradition to Poland, in particular on the significance of Article 16.2 of the Basic Law: "Article 16.2 of the Basic Law basically protects German nationals from extradition, extradition is only permissible in exceptional cases, "provided that principles of the rule of law are observed".

Most of the extradition requests received in Germany are comming from neighbouring countries, but Poland occupies the leading position by a clear margin. In our practice, too, the procedures from Poland occupy a leading position in terms of numbers. And at the same time, we have the best successes in defence. For immigrants from Poland, we can often explain the social integration of the persecuted person in Germany and thus the prerequisites for an obstacle to authorisation in accordance with § 83 b (2) (b) IRG.

German Higher Regional Court Cologne: An extradition obstacle exists under § 83 No. 3 IRG if the persecuted person was convicted in absentia before a Polish court.

German Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf: Pursuant to § 42 (1) IRG, the case must be submitted to the Federal Court of Justice for a decision on the question of law as to whether the supplementary admissibility requirement of § 83 No. 4 IRG, according to which in the case of a lifelong imprisonment the enforcement of the sentence imposed must be reviewed after 20 years at the latest, by the Federal Court of Justice under Art. 560 et seq. of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure provides for the possibility of a pardon - reserved to the President of the Republic in accordance with Article 139 of the Polish Constitution - OLG Düsseldorf, resolution of 10.08.2011.

German Higher Regional Court Rostock: Insofar as the complainant first makes blanket reference to numerous convictions of the Republic of Poland by the European Court of Human Rights for violation of Article 6 CHR, no concrete conclusions can be drawn from this for the present proceedings. There is no general rule of law or experience to the effect that a state whose judiciary has repeatedly violated the principles of the CHR can be presumed to do so in any proceedings conducted there (Rostock Higher Regional Court, decision of 08.06.2010).