European Arrest Warrant

European Arrest Warrant in Frankfurt – Defence in Extradition & Surrender Proceedings Across Germany

A European Arrest Warrant can quickly lead to an arrest in another EU Member State, pre-trial detention pending surrender, and ultimately the person’s transfer to the requesting state. Especially in cross-border matters – for example allegations in white-collar crime or criminal tax law – an early and structured defence often determines whether surrender can be prevented, limited to specific allegations, or at least conducted under the best possible rule-of-law safeguards.

Buchert Jacob Peter, a law firm in Frankfurt am Main, defends clients nationwide in criminal matters, particularly in proceedings with an international dimension. We advise and represent clients on issues relating to the European Arrest Warrant, extradition proceedings, and the legal avenues to challenge enforcement, detention, and surrender/transfer – always with a focus on fundamental rights, procedural guarantees, and the practical situation in the requesting state.

Typical situations involving a European Arrest Warrant

In practice, those affected rarely experience a European Arrest Warrant as an “isolated” issue. It is often preceded by national investigation and detention measures: a domestic arrest warrant, based on suspicion and a ground for detention (for example risk of flight), is implemented “at European level” to enable arrest and surrender from another EU Member State. Additional measures such as seizure or searches are often involved.

• • Arrest during travel, transit, or at a place of residence in an EU state due to an SIS alert (Schengen Information System).
• • Proceedings for fraud, breach of trust, or money laundering with multiple crime scenes and participants in different states.
• • Tax-related allegations such as tax evasion, cross-border VAT constellations (for example VAT carousel fraud), or investigations by tax authorities.
• • Detention issues in connection with alleged illegal employment (“undeclared work”) or allegations under section 266a of the German Criminal Code (StGB) (withholding and misappropriating wages and social security contributions).
• • Parallel proceedings: a national criminal proceeding in Germany alongside prosecution in another EU state.

What is a European Arrest Warrant in legal terms?

A European Arrest Warrant is a judicial decision issued by an EU Member State to secure the arrest and surrender of a requested person in another Member State for the purposes of prosecution or the enforcement of a custodial sentence. Its core principle is mutual recognition: decisions are, as a rule, to be executed across the Union, with exceptions only where expressly provided. In Germany, implementation is primarily governed by sections 78 et seq. of the IRG (International Mutual Assistance Act); incoming requests typically involve the competent judicial authorities, in particular the Local Court (Amtsgericht) and the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) in surrender proceedings.

It is important to distinguish the European Arrest Warrant from purely domestic measures. It is not simply a national arrest warrant issued at trial stage or during investigations. It generally presupposes a national detention order and functions as a search-and-surrender instrument. For the defence, this “two-level” structure is central: it must be clarified which national decision forms the basis and whether the formal and substantive requirements are actually met.

The question of who may issue a European Arrest Warrant can also be relevant: according to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), strict requirements apply regarding the independence of the “issuing judicial authority”. In Germany, this has had significant practical consequences: European Arrest Warrants must meet the Union-law requirements of a judicial decision and cannot be “shifted” to bodies subject to instructions.

How surrender proceedings work in Germany

If a person is arrested in Germany on the basis of a European Arrest Warrant, or is brought to Germany, structured procedural steps apply. Typically, this begins with preliminary arrest and presentation before the competent judge. At that stage, identity is verified, statutory information is provided, and the course of the proceedings is set. Legal representation can be decisive at this point – for example, to assess whether the matter is primarily a summons/interrogation issue or a detention issue, and which documents are already available.

In the next step, pre-trial detention pending surrender is often ordered if grounds for securing the proceedings exist. The Higher Regional Court then reviews the admissibility of extradition/surrender. In parallel, the General Public Prosecutor’s Office may raise barriers to authorisation under the IRG. The procedure is driven by tight deadlines: the legislature provides short timeframes for admissibility decisions; if the requested person consents to simplified surrender, the process is accelerated further.

A major strategic decision concerns “simplified surrender”. While it can reduce the overall duration, it has strategic consequences – especially in relation to the principle of speciality (limiting prosecution in the requesting state to the offences specified in the request). Whether consent makes sense depends on the file situation, detention conditions, the scope of allegations, and the defence objectives.

Grounds for refusal and defence strategies

The Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant distinguishes between mandatory and optional grounds for refusal. Mandatory grounds include situations covered by the prohibition of double jeopardy (ne bis in idem) or certain cases involving judgments in absentia. Optional grounds can include competing domestic proceedings or particular protective considerations. In defence practice, the focus is on precise subsumption: which act is alleged, which underlying decision applies, how is the allegation described, and which legal obstacles arise from fundamental rights and procedural guarantees?

A particularly relevant defence building block is fundamental rights protection. Enforcement must not result in detention conditions that violate human rights. A two-stage assessment is decisive: first, whether there are systemic deficiencies in detention conditions in the requesting state; second, whether there is a concrete risk of inhuman or degrading treatment in the individual case. This line of argument requires care, substance, and often additional information beyond the mere case file.

Further typical procedural issues include access to the files and the question whether the issuing state’s information is sufficient. Particularly where allegations are described only briefly or the form of participation is unclear, a precise analysis can determine whether surrender is admissible at all or whether further clarification must be requested.

Collision with third-country extradition: current case-law lines

Matters become more complex when a European Arrest Warrant coincides with an extradition request from a third country. The CJEU has clarified that, in such collision scenarios, the decision on priority under the Framework Decision may, in principle, be assigned to an executive authority. At the same time, a decisive rule-of-law counterbalance applies: the person concerned must have access to an effective judicial remedy. The standard is the right to effective judicial protection under Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which requires that reasons be comprehensible and that judicial review before enforcement of surrender/extradition remains practically possible.

For the defence, this means that collision cases are not only about “which request first”, but about a legally robust review of the criteria (severity and place of the offence, timing of requests, applicable treaties) and about ensuring effective legal protection. Strategic coordination, deadline control, and a sound reasoning structure are especially crucial in such situations.

Cross-border proceedings in white-collar crime and criminal tax law

European Arrest Warrants arise disproportionately often in complex economic and tax proceedings. Allegations range from billing fraud through breach of trust and corruption scenarios to cross-border money flows classified as money laundering. In criminal tax law, allegations such as tax evasion, estimations in tax-criminal proceedings, or VAT fraud are common; cases often involve extensive documentation, accounting issues, foreign accounts, or international supply chains.

In economically driven offences, defence work is typically file- and numbers-intensive. Strategy therefore needs to consider not only detention and surrender, but also the substance of the allegations: which transactions are meant, which role is attributed, what evidence actually exists, and which non-criminal consequences may follow (for example professional or register-related consequences)?

Our defence approach builds on subject-matter strengths that often intersect in extradition and surrender matters: capital markets criminal law, insolvency criminal law, labour-related allegations, as well as defence in criminal tax cases. Where appropriate, these areas are addressed within our practice areas, allowing detention and surrender issues to be linked with the substantive assessment of the allegations within one consistent defence strategy.

How Buchert Jacob Peter proceeds

In European Arrest Warrant cases, a clear and tactically robust approach is essential. We typically start with a structured assessment: which decision exists, which allegations are asserted, which state is issuing or executing, and at what procedural stage is the case? On that basis, we define defence goals – from a complete prevention of surrender to a limited, rule-of-law-compliant approach safeguarding the principle of speciality.

• • Review of formal requirements and the underlying national detention decision, as well as the factual particulars (time, place, alleged participation).
• • Securing effective defence opportunities, in particular through access to the files and assessing whether additional information must be requested.
• • Asserting suitable refusal and protective grounds (for example fundamental-rights risks, detention conditions, speciality, double jeopardy).
• • Coordination with defence counsel abroad and alignment of a consistent overall strategy, including procedural communication and deadline management.

In addition, we keep our clients informed about developments relevant to the proceedings, for example through updates and legal classifications in our Legal Dictionary. Transparency is particularly important in dynamic situations: what needs to be done immediately, which options exist, and which risks can realistically be assessed?

FAQ on the European Arrest Warrant

What does a European Arrest Warrant mean in practical terms?

A European Arrest Warrant enables arrest in another EU Member State and surrender to the requesting state. It is based on a judicial decision; the executing state reviews admissibility, often accompanied by detention pending surrender and short deadlines. Further background can be found in our Legal Dictionary article on extradition under German law (IRG).

How fast does the procedure move?

Surrender proceedings are designed to be expedited. After arrest, judicial decisions must be taken swiftly; if the requested person consents to simplified surrender, the duration may be reduced significantly. However, the actual timeframe depends heavily on the case file situation, follow-up requests, detention issues, and objections raised.

Can I contest surrender?

Yes. The defence reviews mandatory and optional grounds for refusal, fundamental-rights risks (for example conditions of detention consistent with human dignity), and procedural deficiencies. Substantiated objections are decisive: arguments must be presented in a legally and factually robust manner.

What is the principle of speciality and why does it matter?

The principle of speciality limits what the requesting state may prosecute the surrendered person for: in principle, only the offences underlying the request. Whether and to what extent that protection is waived (for example in simplified surrender) is a strategic decision with significant consequences.

What role do fundamental rights and detention conditions play?

Enforcement must not lead to inhuman or degrading treatment. In practice, courts examine whether there are systemic deficiencies in detention conditions and whether, in the individual case, a concrete risk exists. Fundamental-rights issues can therefore become a central lever of defence.

Do white-collar crime or criminal tax cases play a particular role in EAW matters?

Often, yes. Cross-border allegations are especially common in economic and tax-related proceedings, for example tax evasion, VAT carousel fraud, money laundering, or breach of trust. A defence that combines detention and surrender issues with a substantive analysis of the allegations is particularly valuable in such cases.

Contact our experts in criminal tax law / white-collar crime / criminal defence in Frankfurt

These demands for procedural expertise and strong criminal-law competence are combined by our team of four specialists, who are available to advise and defend you.

• • Rechtsanwalt Frank M. Peter, Fachanwalt für Strafrecht
• • Rechtsanwältin Dr. Caroline Jacob, Fachanwältin für Strafrecht
• • Als Of Counsel: Prof. Dr. Frank Peter Schuster
• • Als Kooperationspartner: Steuerberater und ehemaliger Steuerfahnder Frank Wehrheim

This includes, among other things, the following additional qualifications:

• • Certified advisor in criminal tax law (DAA)
• • Certified accounting expert (Dr. Endriss Tax School)
• • Completed postgraduate studies in criminal tax law (FernUni Hagen)
• • Over 25 years of experience as a tax investigator
• • University professor for international criminal law and white-collar criminal law

For a discreet initial assessment and a viable strategy, you can reach us on +49 69 710 33 330 or by email to Buchert Jacob Peter.

More about criminal defence in Frankfurt (white-collar crime / criminal tax law / general criminal defence) can be found here: criminal tax defence (tax evasion), general criminal defence, white-collar crime defence, attorneys, Legal Dictionary.

 

• Teilen