Language of document :

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)

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

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;

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.