“Dual Legal Representation” of a Requested Person in European Arrest Warrant Proceedings – Remarks from the Polish Perspective
Loading...
Date
2020-06-30
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Wydawnictwo KUL
Abstract
W artykule podjęto próbę udzielenia odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy prawo polskie oferuje możliwość tzw. "podwójnej reprezentacji", jak tego wymaga art. 10 dyrektywy unijnej 2013/48 oraz art. 5 dyrektywy unijnej 2016/1919. Analiza obejmuje obie perspektywy, to znaczy zbadano zarówno możliwość realizowania prawa do "podwójnej reprezentacji" w postępowaniu w sprawie wykonania Europejskiego Nakazu Aresztowania prowadzonym w Polsce, jak i prawo do wyznaczenia obrońcy w Polsce jako kraju wydania tego nakazu. Rozważania dotyczą jedynie Europejskich Nakazów Aresztowania wydanych w celu ścigania. Chociaż oba wymienione przepisy dyrektyw nie zostały wdrożone do prawa krajowego, ich bezpośrednie stosowanie może zapewnić pełne korzystanie przez osobę ściganą z prawa do "podwójnej reprezentacji". Dzięki temu, że prawo polskie traktuje osobę ściganą jak oskarżonego w postępowaniu karnym, Kodeks postępowania karnego oferuje podstawy prawne do ustanowienia/wyznaczenia osobie ściganej obrońcy w Polsce jako kraju wydania Europejskiego Nakazu Aresztowania.
This paper focuses on the question whether Polish law offers an adequate legal framework for dual representation, as required by Article 10 of the EU Directive 2013/48 and Article 5 of the EU Directive 2016/1919. It explores both perspectives: dual representation in proceedings concerning execution of EAW conducted by Polish authorities as well as the right to appoint a lawyer in Poland by the requested person in a case where the EAW is issued by the Polish authorities. The scope of the ensuing analysis is confined to EAWs issued for prosecution of the requested person. Although both above mentioned provisions of EU Directives have not been transposed into Polish national law, their direct application may ensure full exercise of the requested person’s right to dual representation. Thanks to the fact that, in Poland, the requested person is treated as a quasi-defendant in criminal proceedings, the Code of Criminal Procedure offers a legal framework allowing for appointment of the defence lawyer in Poland as the issuing state.
This paper focuses on the question whether Polish law offers an adequate legal framework for dual representation, as required by Article 10 of the EU Directive 2013/48 and Article 5 of the EU Directive 2016/1919. It explores both perspectives: dual representation in proceedings concerning execution of EAW conducted by Polish authorities as well as the right to appoint a lawyer in Poland by the requested person in a case where the EAW is issued by the Polish authorities. The scope of the ensuing analysis is confined to EAWs issued for prosecution of the requested person. Although both above mentioned provisions of EU Directives have not been transposed into Polish national law, their direct application may ensure full exercise of the requested person’s right to dual representation. Thanks to the fact that, in Poland, the requested person is treated as a quasi-defendant in criminal proceedings, the Code of Criminal Procedure offers a legal framework allowing for appointment of the defence lawyer in Poland as the issuing state.
Description
Keywords
europejski nakaz aresztowania, prawo do obrony, dyrektywa 2013/48, European arrest warrant, right to defence, dual representation, Directive 2013/48
Citation
"Review of European and Comparative Law", T. 41, nr 2, s. 35-54