Riverside quay, glass and stone buildings, European quarter.

Dedicated page · Europe and international

Extradition, arrest warrants, Interpol and SIS

A red notice, a Schengen alert and a European arrest warrant do not have the same effect. Maître Dilbadi Gasimov identifies the instrument, the authority that decides, and the papers to gather — throughout France, including for clients abroad.

Consultations also in Russian, by appointment.

Find the right section Write to the firm

The firm handles cases throughout France and receives clients at 67 rue Boecklin, Strasbourg. Illustration of a European institutional setting; no particular court is depicted.

Instrument

Before the story of the facts.

Authority

Court, government or commission.

Written time limit

The one printed on the notice.

Separate files

Interpol is not the SIS.

01 · Where to start

Start from the document received, not from the word that alarms.

The reading note is built in your browser. Nothing you select is sent to the firm or stored on a server. It does not assess the case and it does not suspend any time limit.

Situation or document

Where the person is

Nationality, if known

Reading note

European arrest warrant

What it is

A European arrest warrant is a judicial decision of a Member State, issued for prosecution or for the enforcement of a sentence, so that the person is arrested and surrendered by another Member State. The French Code of Criminal Procedure sets the regime in articles 695-11 and following. The thresholds are, in principle, a maximum sentence of at least one year, or a sentence imposed of at least four months.

What it is not

This is not diplomatic extradition. The French Government does not decide by decree. It is not an Interpol notice either: the warrant is the title; a notice is only a way of circulating it.

Who decides

The issuing judicial authority issues the warrant. In France, the territorially competent Principal Public Prosecutor and the Investigation Chamber of the court of appeal conduct execution. The person has the right to a lawyer and, if needed, an interpreter.

Timing: appearance within five working days; a decision within seven days if the person consents, with no appeal; within twenty days if they do not. An appeal within three clear days, a written case within five days of the file arriving, and a judgment of the Court of Cassation within forty days. If it upholds the decision, surrender takes place within ten days of the decision becoming final.
The European framework in principle requires a final decision within sixty days of the arrest, extendable by thirty.
Without a waiver or another exception to specialty, the issuing State must seek consent for other prior offences. The Chamber rules within thirty days. Onward surrender to another Member State requires a separate examination.
If the facts are classified as terrorist, the Paris Court of Appeal has concurrent jurisdiction, even when the arrest took place elsewhere.
The Chamber does not retry guilt. It reviews the conditions of surrender.

First steps

01Read the warrant: identity, facts, date, classification, sentence incurred or imposed, issuing authority.
02Do not treat consent to surrender as a formality. It is irrevocable, and it is not a waiver of specialty.
03At the hearing the two questions are separate: consent to surrender, then, only if that consent is maintained, waiver of specialty.
04List at once the possible objections: prior judgment, limitation, facts committed in France, sentence already served, conditions of detention.
05Check whether the person is already prosecuted or detained in France for other facts: surrender may be postponed or temporary.

European surrender Specialty and further information Papers to gather See this path

Judgments linked to this note

The Chamber reviews surrender. It does not retry guilt.

02 · Understand

Four instruments that the papers often mix together.

The word used on the telephone — “Interpol”, “Schengen”, “international warrant” — does not name the procedure. Start from the document, the State and the authority that signed it.

Four closed files on a desk, one with a citron edge. — Four files, four authorities. Start from the document received, not from the word used on the telephone.

European arrest warrant

A judicial decision of a Member State. Surrender by the Investigation Chamber. Time limits from the Framework Decision. No decree.

Extradition

A request from a third State, diplomatic channel, opinion of the Chamber, Prime Minister’s decree. Applicable treaties and articles 696 and following of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Interpol notice or diffusion

A request for cooperation. A red notice prepares an arrest. Under French law it is not, by itself, the basis for detention.

SIS alert

A European file with several purposes. Arrest, refusal of entry, return, disappearance, check or object: the category changes the court.

Diagrams

The document received decides the path.

Three readings, before the detail. A diagram orients. It does not describe a case and it does not replace the document that was served.

Four papers, four authorities

Start from the document received, not from the word.

European arrest warrant

Path of the note

01 · What it is
A judicial decision of a Member State, for prosecution or a sentence.
02 · Who decides
The Investigation Chamber rules on execution.
03 · What is not decided here
There is no Prime Minister’s decree.

Extradition outside the Union

01 · What it is
A request from a third State, in principle through the diplomatic channel.
02 · Who decides
An opinion of the Chamber, then a Prime Minister’s decree.
03 · What is not decided here
A favourable opinion does not, by itself, hand the person over.

Notice or diffusion

01 · What it is
A cooperation request circulated by Interpol.
02 · Who decides
The French court, for liberty. The CCF, for the file.
03 · What is not decided here
The notice is neither a judgment nor the warrant.

SIS alert

01 · What it is
A European alert: arrest, entry, return, a check, or an object.
02 · Who decides
The recorded category points to the court or the administration.
03 · What is not decided here
The SIS is not Interpol, and it is not the title itself.

A reading diagram. It does not assess the case.

Three entries, three requests

Interpol notice

An application to the CCF, in Lyon.

SIS alert

Ministry of the Interior, then the CNIL if needed.

National title

Warrant, decree, or prefectural decision.

Path of the note

Deleting one does not remove the other two.

What the SIS category decides

The word “Schengen” covers several purposes. The recorded category changes the authority.

ArrestInvestigation Chamber, with the warrant.
Refusal of entryThe document served. The time limit is often short.
ReturnThe return decision, not a warrant.
DisappearanceProtection. Not an extradition.
Discreet checkAn access request. Not a hearing.
ObjectSeizure of the object, not surrender of the person.

The Aranyosi test, in two steps

Judgment of 5 April 2016. A general report on prisons is not, alone, enough to refuse surrender.

Does objective, up-to-date evidence show systemic or generalised deficiencies, or deficiencies affecting particular groups or facilities?

No refusal on that basis alone.

Yes

Ask for the actual conditions of detention.

Is a real risk established for this person, in that facility?

Yes

Postpone surrender and seek further information. If the risk cannot be excluded within a reasonable time, consider whether the procedure must end.

This objection does not stop surrender.

A reading diagram. It does not assess the case.

Where the two procedures separate

Arrest, information, a lawyer

European arrest warrantPath of the note
01The Principal Public Prosecutor checks identity. Consent is often raised here.
02The Chamber hears the grounds for refusal. It does not retry the case.
03Physical surrender. No decree.

Extradition
01A diplomatic request, then transmission to the Principal Public Prosecutor.
02Opinion of the Chamber. If it is unfavourable, extradition stops.
03Prime Minister’s decree. The challenge to that decree is not the appeal against the opinion.

03 · What the firm looks at

The review depends on the document.

The work depends on how far the case has gone. What follows is general orientation. It does not replace reading the papers.

01 · Surrender

European arrest warrant

A judicial decision moves from one Member State to another, without the diplomatic channel.

Article 695-11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure defines the European arrest warrant as the decision by which a Member State requests the arrest and surrender of a person wanted for prosecution or for the enforcement of a custodial sentence or a detention order.

The Investigation Chamber checks that the warrant is regular and that no mandatory or optional ground for refusal is made out. It does not examine guilt. The person’s consent, when given, sharply reduces the time limits: it assumes they have understood what they are giving up.

If the person is already prosecuted in France, or must serve a sentence there, for facts other than those in the warrant, article 695-39 allows the Chamber, after ruling on execution, to postpone surrender or to order a temporary surrender governed by a written agreement between judicial authorities.

Amnesty, minority, prior judgment for the same facts.
Limitation, in the cases provided by the Code.
Lack of dual criminality, outside the list of offences exempted from that check where the maximum sentence in the issuing State reaches three years.
Facts committed wholly or partly in France.
French national, and an undertaking to enforce the sentence.
A real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention, in particular as to conditions of detention — the Court of Justice’s Aranyosi and Căldăraru case law.

02 · Third State

Ordinary extradition

The request comes from a State that does not use the European arrest warrant. The court reviews. The Government decides.

Article 696-8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that an extradition request is addressed to the French Government through the diplomatic channel, with a judgment, an order for trial or a warrant, and a copy of the applicable texts. The Minister of Justice, after checking the file, seizes the Principal Public Prosecutor.

The Investigation Chamber gives an opinion. It reviews the legal conditions — identity, dual criminality, limitation, nationality, the nature of the offence, the requesting State’s undertakings. A negative opinion prevents extradition. A positive opinion does not dispense with the Prime Minister’s decree.

The appeal to the Court of Cassation against the opinion and the challenge to the decree do not have the same court, or the same function. The two time limits are watched separately.

The principle that nationals are not extradited, subject to treaties.
Political offence, with the exceptions in modern treaties.
Death penalty: an assurance is needed that it will not be carried out.
Article 3 of the Convention: a real risk of torture or inhuman treatment in the requesting State.
Specialty principle after surrender.

03 · Cooperation

Interpol notices and diffusions

Interpol, whose General Secretariat is in Lyon, circulates a request. It does not judge.

The red notice is the best known, because it requests arrest with a view to extradition. The other colours have other purposes: identification, warning, disappearance, danger, modus operandi, UN sanctions. A diffusion can produce effects close to those of a red notice, with less formality.

In France, the lawyer first checks which national act would justify any deprivation of liberty. The lawyer then checks whether the record itself can be challenged before the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files, as to data quality or Article 3 of the Constitution.

The two steps do not replace each other. A detained person cannot wait for the CCF’s outcome before preparing the hearing.

Note the colour, or the fact that it is a diffusion.
Link the record to the warrant, the judgment or the administrative decision.
Raise refugee status or a pending asylum claim.
Prepare the application to the CCF with documents, not with a narrative alone.

04 · Schengen

Alerts in the SIS

One European database, several purposes. The category recorded changes the competent court.

Since the 2018 recast, three regulations organise the system: police and judicial cooperation (2018/1862), borders (2018/1861), return (2018/1860). The French SIRENE Bureau is the technical correspondent of the other States. It is not the judge of surrender.

An arrest alert is argued with the warrant. A return alert relates to the return decision, such as an order to leave; refusal of entry and stay has its own basis, for example an entry ban. These administrative decisions and their appeal deadlines must be distinguished from a request for erasure from the file.

If the basis has disappeared and the alert remains, the request for erasure goes to the Ministry of the Interior, which has two months to answer. The CNIL comes after that, not instead of it. A discreet check can exist without the person having been told.

The French right of access published by the CNIL runs through the Ministry of the Interior. Silence or refusal opens an intervention by the CNIL. That administrative path does not suspend a criminal hearing already fixed.

Have the alert classified in writing.
Do not send an access request to Interpol for an SIS alert, or the reverse.
Keep the acknowledgement sent to the Ministry.
Link the case with immigration litigation when an order to leave the territory or a refusal of entry is served.

05 · Files

Access, correction, erasure

Leaving a file means writing to the body that holds it, with a precise ground.

The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files is an independent body. It rules on access to data, their correction and their deletion. It does not acquit, and it does not cancel a warrant issued by a national judge.

For the SIS, the person first asks the Ministry of the Interior whether data concern them, and may seek correction or erasure. The CNIL steps in if that request does not succeed. Data in an alert created by another State also depend on that State: the French answer may refer the person to it.

A useful strategy lines up the requests: Interpol file, SIS, national warrant, prefectural decision. Each line has its addressee and its time limit.

Full identity and a copy of a document.
References already known, without inventing a number.
A decision of cancellation, enforcement of sentence, dismissal, or asylum.
Proof of sending and of the date.

06 · Two States

Defence of a person arrested outside France

The family gathers papers. The local lawyer pleads. The firm links the two if a French title is in the file.

The first question is simple and often badly put: is France seeking the person, or is the person prosecuted for local facts? In the first case, the French warrant, its facts and the specialty principle are worked on at once. In the second, the firm’s role from France is to explain the position to the family and to pass on documents, not to replace counsel in the detaining State.

Where a person has been surrendered to France under a European arrest warrant, article 695-21 of the Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits later extradition to a third State without the consent of the Member State that surrendered them. The point is frequent in cases that follow one another, and it is checked before any decree.

Place of detention, authority seized, lawyer already named.
Nature of the title shown to the family.
Civil-status and nationality documents.
French decisions already given on the same facts.

04 · Sequence

Two timetables that do not overlap.

The Framework Decision in principle requires a final decision within 10 days of consent, or within 60 days of arrest without consent, with a possible 30-day extension. Surrender follows in principle within 10 days of the final decision. French time limits for appearance, decision and appeal remain separate: see the detail below.

The Investigation Chamber sits at the court of appeal. It reviews the conditions of surrender or extradition. It does not retry guilt.

European arrest warrant
01Arrest and informationThe person is told of the warrant, of its content, and of the right to a lawyer. The time when liberty was lost is recorded.
02Principal Public ProsecutorThe Principal Public Prosecutor checks identity and takes the person’s statements. Consent is often raised here for the first time.
03Investigation ChamberThe person appears with a lawyer. The Chamber hears submissions on grounds for refusal and on the conditions of detention alleged. It does not retry the foreign case.
04Decision and appealThe decision on execution may be appealed to the Court of Cassation on the conditions set by the Code. That time limit is not the same as the Framework Decision’s time limits.
05SurrenderThe Principal Public Prosecutor organises the physical surrender with the issuing authority. Postponed or temporary surrender remains possible if a French procedure is pending.

Extradition outside the Union
01Diplomatic requestThe requesting State sends the Government a judgment, a warrant or an order for trial, with the applicable texts.
02Transmission to the Prosecutor General’s officeAfter the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and of Justice, the file is sent to the competent Principal Public Prosecutor.
03Arrest, including provisional arrestA provisional arrest can precede the formal request. The detention that follows is reviewed. It is not the foreign sentence.
04Opinion of the Investigation ChamberThe opinion concerns the legal conditions. If it is unfavourable, extradition is not granted. If it is favourable, it is not a decree.
05Decree, then separate challengesThe Prime Minister decides. The appeal against the opinion and the challenge to the decree are prepared as two different cases.

Empty hearing room, pale stone and an oak table.

Investigation Chamber

The sequence, specialty, further information.

The Chamber does not retry the facts. It decides on surrender, or it gives an opinion on extradition. Two questions stay separate: consent to leave, and waiver of specialty.

The appearance takes place in a hearing room. The starting point of a time limit depends on the act and the remedy concerned.

European arrest warrant
01
Seising
The Chamber is seised at once. The person appears within five working days of being brought before the Principal Public Prosecutor.
02
Two questions, in this order
Consent to surrender, after being told the consequences. That consent is irrevocable. Only if it is maintained does the Chamber ask whether the person waives specialty, after separate information. That waiver is also irrevocable. Consent to surrender is not a waiver of specialty.
03
If the person consents
The Chamber rules within seven days of the appearance, unless further information is ordered. There is no appeal.
04
If the person does not consent
The Chamber rules within twenty days of the appearance, unless further information is ordered. The Principal Public Prosecutor and the person may appeal to the Court of Cassation within three clear days.

Extradition
01
Seising
If the person tells the Principal Public Prosecutor that they do not consent, the Chamber is seised without delay. They appear within ten working days of that presentation.
02
Opinion
A reasoned opinion within one month of the appearance, unless further information is ordered. The opinion is unfavourable if the legal conditions are not met, or if there is an obvious error.
03
Effect of the opinion
An unfavourable opinion stops extradition. A favourable opinion surrenders no one: the Prime Minister’s decree is a separate act, challenged before the Conseil d’État.
04
Appeal
It is narrow. Only formal defects that deprive the opinion of the essential conditions of its legal existence.

Further information

European arrest warrant

If the information in the warrant is not enough to decide on surrender, the Chamber asks the issuing judicial authority for the further information required, to be received within ten days at most. The seven-day and twenty-day limits do not run in the same way while this is ordered. It is not a general investigation. An optional ground, in particular serving the sentence in France, is raised in a written brief. When the warrant is too vague to check a mandatory ground, such as a final decision for the same facts, further information is required.

Extradition

Further information sets aside the one-month limit. It is sought when a document is missing to check a legal condition: a translation, the foreign statute, prescription, an assurance on the death penalty, the actual conditions of detention. It is not a way to gain time for its own sake.

Specialty, before and after

At the hearing

The question is asked separately, and only if consent to surrender is maintained. A refusal to waive should be recorded. It is prepared before the hearing, not in the room.

After surrender to France

The person may not be prosecuted, sentenced or detained for a prior offence other than the one that justified surrender, except in five cases: waiver at the time of consent, waiver after surrender, consent of the State that surrendered them, remaining in the territory more than forty-five days after final release despite having had the opportunity to leave, or a voluntary return, or an offence not punishable by imprisonment.

If France surrendered the person

For prosecution or enforcement of a sentence for other prior offences, the French authority’s consent is in principle required, unless specialty has been waived or another exception applies. Onward surrender to another Member State follows separate rules: the exceptions and any required consent must be checked separately. The Chamber before which the person appeared is seised. A record of the person’s statements is attached. A lawyer may supplement them. The Chamber rules within thirty days of receiving the request. That decision may be appealed to the Court of Cassation. If the person waived specialty, this further request is not required for the prior offences covered by the waiver.

Extradition

Extradition is granted only on condition that the person will not be prosecuted or sentenced for a prior offence other than the one that motivated it, subject to the exceptions of that procedure. It is not the European arrest warrant mechanism. After surrender, if the requesting State wants to prosecute a prior offence, it asks for authorisation. The opinion is that of the Chamber before which the person appeared. It may be given on the papers alone.

The appeal, then surrender

Who may appeal, and when

If the person consented to surrender, the Chamber’s decision cannot be appealed. If they did not consent, the Principal Public Prosecutor and the person may appeal within three clear days of the decision being given. The notice is filed at the registry. The file is sent to the criminal chamber within forty-eight hours. The written case, setting out the grounds, must be filed within five days of the file reaching the Court of Cassation, or the right is lost.

While the appeal is pending

The Court of Cassation rules within forty days of the appeal. Until it has ruled, the Chamber’s decision is not final. The time for surrender does not run.

If the Court of Cassation upholds the decision

The surrender decision becomes final. The Principal Public Prosecutor has the person surrendered to the issuing judicial authority within ten days at most. If force majeure prevents it, a new date is agreed, and surrender takes place within ten days of that date. After those limits, a person still detained is released, unless surrender is postponed because they are being prosecuted in France, or must serve a sentence there, for a different offence. A humanitarian postponement, in particular for age or health, is possible: a new date is then set, with the same ten-day limit.

If the Court of Cassation quashes the decision

Surrender does not proceed on the annulled judgment. The case is sent back, in principle to the same Chamber differently composed.

Terrorism and the Paris Court of Appeal

When the facts in a European arrest warrant are classified as terrorist, the Paris Court of Appeal has concurrent jurisdiction, even if the arrest took place elsewhere (Article 695-28-1). The chamber of the place of arrest may also be seised. The statute does not make this a monopoly. For the prosecution, investigation and trial of terrorist acts linked to France, the national counter-terrorism prosecutor and the Paris courts have concurrent jurisdiction over the whole country (Articles 706-16 and 706-17).

The European framework in principle requires a final decision within sixty days of the arrest, extendable by thirty. Articles 695-28-1, 695-29, 695-31, 695-33, 695-37, 695-46 and 568-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the European arrest warrant; Articles 696-15, 696-6 and 696-35 for extradition; Articles 706-16 and 706-17 for a terrorist prosecution. Further information or an immunity may affect the applicable time limits. An application for release has its own deadlines and does not, by itself, suspend the appeal deadline. Check the starting point against the documents and legal provisions.

05 · Notices

The colour does not name the court.

Select the wording that appears on the paper. The word “Interpol”, without a colour or a reference, is not enough to choose the path.

Red notice

To locate a person wanted for prosecution or to serve a sentence, and to request provisional arrest with a view to extradition or surrender.

Limit

It does not convict, and in France it does not stand in for a European arrest warrant or an extradition request.

Useful next step

Identify the national title. If appropriate, prepare an application to the CCF without confusing the two procedures.

06 · SIS

Identify the alert before choosing the remedy.

Border-control hall, empty lanes and cool light. — A refusal to board or a check may reveal an SIS alert. The recorded category — arrest, entry, return or check — decides the path.

Closed passport and a plain file on a stone counter. — The order to leave, the ban on return and the alert are three separate acts. The file does not mix them.

Arrest for surrender or extradition

An alert created to find a person and allow arrest. It ordinarily accompanies a European arrest warrant or an extradition request. Regulation (EU) 2018/1862.

Limit

The alert circulates the search. The title, and the grounds for refusal, are those of the warrant or the extradition.

Useful next step

Read the warrant. Put the merits before the Investigation Chamber, and only then the file.

07 · Papers

Prepare the file without sending everything.

The list follows the situation chosen above. The ticks stay in this browser. Nothing is sent.

of the reading-note items ticked

The document received: notice, police report, warrant, refusal to board, or prefectural decision.
An identity document and any proof of nationality.
The chronology: arrest, service, hearing, with the times if the person is detained.
The requesting State, the legal classification of the facts, and the dates alleged.
Decisions already given: conviction, dismissal, asylum, sentence already served.
A copy of the European arrest warrant and of its translation.
Foreign decisions already given on the same facts.
Material on conditions of detention in the issuing State, if any exists.

08 · Caution

Reflexes to keep before any step.

01
Never calculate a time limit from memory. Its starting point depends on the remedy: arrest, appearance, delivery of the decision or service. For an appeal against a European arrest warrant surrender decision, time in principle runs from the decision being given; have the document and applicable provision checked immediately.
02
An Interpol notice, an SIS alert and a national warrant are three objects. Deleting one does not remove the need to answer the other two.
03
Consent to European surrender confirmed before the Investigation Chamber is irrevocable. It is not given in order to “speed up release” without measuring the facts covered.
04
The Investigation Chamber does not try innocence. Papers about guilt do not replace the grounds for refusal.
05
Article 3 of the Convention can bar surrender where conditions of detention in the requesting State create a real risk. The allegation has to be documented.
06
A Union citizen sought by a third State is not in the same position as a French national sought in ordinary extradition proceedings, nor as a person named in a European arrest warrant.
07
After surrender, the specialty principle and, where relevant, article 695-21 limit what the State may do next. The point arises before transfer, not after.
08
Nothing entered in the orientation on this page is sent to the firm. Only a direct exchange — telephone, email, appointment — opens an assessment of the case.

Glass facade of a European court, stone plaza.

Case law

A few judgments, to place the argument.

These are landmarks, not advice. Each note is a short reading. The link opens the official text. A judgment does not transfer to another case without the papers.

Luxembourg, Strasbourg or Paris: the building does not say which judgment applies.

Convention and Union

European Court of Human Rights · 7 July 1989

Soering v. the United Kingdom

Application no. 14038/88

Extraditing a person to a State where they face a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 can violate the Convention. In that case, the risk was the “death row phenomenon” in the United States.

Read the judgmentHUDOC · PDF

European Court of Human Rights · 4 September 2014

Trabelsi v. Belgium

Application no. 140/10

The Court held that Belgium violated Article 3 by extraditing the applicant to the United States, where he faced an irreducible life sentence. Disregarding the interim measure was a separate violation of Article 34. It is a Belgian judgment: it illuminates Article 3. It does not rule on a French decree.

Read the judgmentHUDOC · PDF

Court of Justice of the European Union · 5 April 2016

Linked to the note

Aranyosi and Căldăraru

C-404/15 and C-659/15 PPU

Where there is objective, reliable, specific and up-to-date evidence of systemic or generalised deficiencies, or deficiencies affecting particular groups or facilities in the issuing State, the executing authority must ask about the actual conditions of detention and may postpone surrender. General reports are not, by themselves, enough to refuse.

Read the judgmentEUR-Lex · Official text

Court of Justice of the European Union · 15 October 2019

Linked to the note

Dorobantu

C-128/18

The review concerns the facility where the person will actually be held: personal space, sanitation, freedom of movement. The executing State applies Article 4 of the Charter, not a higher standard of its own national law.

Read the judgmentEUR-Lex · Official text

Court of Justice of the European Union · 6 September 2016

Petruhhin

C-182/15

A Member State need not give every Union citizen the same protection against extradition as its own nationals. Before extraditing to a third State, it informs the Member State of nationality and gives that State the opportunity to issue a European arrest warrant. It also checks Article 19 of the Charter.

Read the judgmentEUR-Lex · Official text

French courts

Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber · 17 June 2020

Linked to the note

Specialty principle

Appeal no. 19-84.791

Where specialty under article 695-18 is raised against enforcement of a sentence for facts prior to the surrender and other than those that justified it, the court seised must rule on that objection. It cannot declare itself without jurisdiction and leave the outcome to the prosecutor.

Read the judgmentCour de cassation · Full text, in French

Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber · 5 November 2024

Linked to the note

Refugee and surrender

Appeal no. 24-85.705, published

Except where the issuing State shows a systemic failure, the Investigation Chamber cannot make surrender of a refugee conditional on an undertaking not to send the person later to their country of origin. It need not seek that undertaking under article 695-33.

Read the judgmentCour de cassation · Full text, in French

Conseil d’État · 5 March 2024

Extradition decree

No. 484266

An extradition decree is challenged before the Conseil d’État by an action for excess of power. The duty to give reasons does not require the decree to set out the steps taken to inform the State of nationality under Petruhhin, as clarified by BY (C-398/19).

Read the judgmentConseil d’État · Full text, in French BY, C-398/19

Constitutional Council · 9 September 2016

Extradition custody

No. 2016-561/562 QPC

The bench judge may leave the person at liberty, with no supervision, where they offer sufficient guarantees that they will appear. They are entitled to a lawyer when placement is decided, and to know the Principal Public Prosecutor’s submissions. Release is required when extradition detention exceeds a reasonable time.

The provisions are constitutional, subject to three reservations: liberty with no supervision is possible if appearance is guaranteed; a lawyer, and knowledge of the submissions, at the moment of placement; release is required beyond a reasonable time.

Read the judgmentConseil constitutionnel · PDF

Court of Cassation, criminal chamber · 2 May 2024

Arrest warrant from the United Kingdom

Appeal no. 24-82.116

Surrender to the United Kingdom is governed by the Trade and Cooperation Agreement of 24 December 2020. The disproportionate character of the sentence faced is not a ground for non-execution. In a life-sentence case, Article 604(a) of the Agreement allows a guarantee of review to be required, on request or at the latest after twenty years.

The Court dismisses the appeal. Disproportion of the sentence faced is not a ground for non-execution. In a life-sentence case, surrender may be made subject to a guarantee of review, on request or at the latest after twenty years.

Read the judgmentLégifrance · Full text, in French

09 · Vocabulary

The words that change the path.

Filter

Investigation Chamber: A formation of the court of appeal which, in surrender and extradition, reviews the legal conditions. For a European arrest warrant it rules on execution. For ordinary extradition it gives an opinion.
European arrest warrant: A judicial decision of an EU Member State requesting the arrest and surrender of a person for prosecution or for the enforcement of a sentence.
Extradition: The procedure by which one State surrenders a person to another, outside the European arrest warrant. In France it combines a judicial opinion and a government decree.
Surrender: The word used, in practice, for transfer under a European arrest warrant, to distinguish it from classic extradition.
Red notice: An Interpol cooperation request aimed at locating a person and obtaining provisional arrest with a view to extradition or surrender.
Diffusion: A request sent directly by an Interpol National Central Bureau to other countries, without necessarily passing through a published notice.
SIS: Schengen Information System. A European database of alerts consulted at borders and during checks. Distinct from Interpol’s files.
SIRENE Bureau: The national service that exchanges supplementary information on alerts with the other Schengen States. In France it does not rule on surrender.
CCF: Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files, based in Lyon. It deals with requests for access, correction and deletion concerning Interpol processing.
Dual criminality: The requirement that the facts are also punishable in the State that surrenders. The European arrest warrant dispenses with that check for a list of offences, above a sentence threshold.
Specialty principle: After surrender, the person may in principle be prosecuted only for the facts that justified surrender, unless an exception applies or consent is given.
Ne bis in idem: The prohibition on being prosecuted or punished twice for the same facts. A classic ground for refusing surrender, when its conditions are met.
Article 3 ECHR: The prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment. Since Soering, it can bar extradition or surrender where there is a real risk in the destination State.
Provisional arrest: Deprivation of liberty before the formal extradition request has arrived, or while the decision on surrender is pending. It is not enforcement of the foreign sentence.
Extradition decree: The Prime Minister’s decision granting or refusing extradition after the Investigation Chamber’s opinion. It does not exist in the European arrest warrant procedure.
Issuing State / executing State: For a European arrest warrant: the State that issues the warrant, and the State asked to arrest and surrender. Those roles are not the same as the State of nationality.

10 · Frequent questions

General answers, not advice.

Does a red notice, by itself, authorise detention in France?

No. It asks member countries to locate the person and, under their own law, to carry out a provisional arrest. In France, deprivation of liberty rests on a domestic title: a European arrest warrant, an extradition request, an alert followed by a procedure, or a requisition. The notice may also be challenged, if the conditions are met, before the CCF.

Are Interpol and the SIS the same file?

No. Interpol is an international organisation, outside the European Union, whose notices are reviewed by the CCF. The SIS is a European system, governed by the 2018 regulations, consulted at borders and by the police of the Schengen States. Both can concern the same person. The access procedures are not interchangeable.

Who actually decides on extradition?

For a European arrest warrant, the Investigation Chamber rules on execution. There is no decree. For extradition to a third State, the Chamber gives an opinion: if it is unfavourable, extradition does not take place; if it is favourable, the Prime Minister decides by decree. The administrative court may be seized of that decree, under public-law conditions.

Can a person consent to being surrendered?

Yes, in the European arrest warrant procedure. Consent shortens the time limits in the Framework Decision. It must be informed: the person must know which facts are covered and what they will no longer be able to argue before the Chamber. It is not usefully decided in a corridor, without the papers.

Does deleting a notice bring down the warrant?

No. The CCF rules on Interpol processing. A warrant issued by a judge, an SIS alert and a possible prefectural decision follow other paths. The converse is also true: cancellation of a national warrant is an argument before the CCF, not an automatic deletion on the same day.

Can a French national be extradited or surrendered?

In ordinary extradition, Article 696-4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure bars extradition of a person who was French at the time of the alleged offence, subject to the applicable treaty. For a European arrest warrant, French nationality is not an automatic refusal; enforcement of the sentence in France may justify refusal under conditions. For surrender to the United Kingdom, France refuses to surrender its nationals, including those who were French when the act was committed.

What should be done in the first hours if a relative is arrested?

Note the place, the authority, the time, and the document that was read. Do not multiply contradictory accounts to several interlocutors. Distinguish a local case from a French request. Instruct a lawyer in the State of detention and, if a French title exists or is announced, the firm following that title.

11 · Sources

Texts to open with the file.

12 · First reading

Bring the document, not only the story.

Maître Dilbadi Gasimov handles cases throughout France, with remote consultations and appointments at 67 rue Boecklin, Strasbourg. The exchange starts from the document served, the State concerned, and the time the measure began if the person is deprived of liberty.

Mon–Fri, 9:00–18:00 · French, English, Russian

03 67 07 96 78 WhatsApp

67 rue Boecklin, 67000 StrasbourgAddress · directions avocat.gasimov@gmail.comEmail Online paymentCard · Stripe