The Op-Ed outlines how the Court clarified the relationship between the mandatory ground for refusal of surrender based on fundamental rights under Article 1(3) of the EAW Framework Decision and the optional ground under Article 4(6), and argues that the ruling signals a Court increasingly ready to subordinate individual guarantees to a unifying vision of EU-wide punishment, raising questions about the future of the rights-centred balance struck since Aranyosi and Căldăraru.
At the Crossroad Between Rehabilitation and Impunity: The Court Departs From a Rights-Centred Approach to EU Judicial Cooperation in Rugu and Aucroix (C‑722/23 and C-91/24)
Adriano Martufi
2026-01-01
Abstract
The Op-Ed outlines how the Court clarified the relationship between the mandatory ground for refusal of surrender based on fundamental rights under Article 1(3) of the EAW Framework Decision and the optional ground under Article 4(6), and argues that the ruling signals a Court increasingly ready to subordinate individual guarantees to a unifying vision of EU-wide punishment, raising questions about the future of the rights-centred balance struck since Aranyosi and Căldăraru.File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
