1. A European arrest warrant may be issued for acts which, under the law of the issuing Member State, may be punishable by a custodial sentence or imprisonment of up to 12 months or, where a sentence has been imposed or a detention order has been imposed, by a custodial sentence of at least four months. (c) in the case of an arrest warrant within the meaning of the EU-Iceland-Norway Agreement in the form set out in the Annex to the EU-Iceland-Norway Agreement. 1. This arrest warrant shall be drawn up or translated into one of the official languages of the executing Member State, if known, or into another language accepted by that State. 3. Where an arrest warrant has been issued by a State which has made a notification in accordance with paragraph 2 or by a State on whose behalf such notification has been made, the State executing the arrest warrant may apply reciprocity. 4. Where, in certain cases, the European arrest warrant cannot be executed within the time limits referred to in paragraphs 2 or 3, the executing judicial authority shall immediately inform the issuing judicial authority, stating the reasons for the delay. In this case, the deadlines may be extended by a further 30 days. (ii) the person against whom the European arrest warrant was issued was arrested for the purpose of executing the European arrest warrant before 23.00 .m 31 December 2020. 5. As long as the executing judicial authority has not taken a final decision on the arrest warrant, it shall ensure that the substantive conditions for the effective surrender of the person remain fulfilled.

6. Section 5 of the 2003 Act is amended by replacing “relevant arrest warrant” with “relevant arrest warrant” in both places where it occurs. (2) The programme of measures for the implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of criminal decisions, provided for in point 37 of the conclusions of the Tampere European Council and adopted by the Council on 30 November 2000, addresses the issue of the mutual execution of arrest warrants. 3. Where a person against whom a European arrest warrant has been issued for the purpose of prosecution is a national or resident of the executing Member State, surrender may be subject to the return of the person to the executing Member State after having been heard in order to serve the custodial sentence or detention order imposed on him in the issuing Member State. 2. The issuing judicial authority may request the International Criminal Police Organisation (`Interpol`) to submit an arrest warrant. The MFA Framework Decision stipulates that an arrest warrant may only be issued if an offence of deprivation of liberty or detention can be punished by a custodial sentence of up to one year, or in cases of conviction where the remaining custodial sentence is four months or more. However, this can include a variety of trivial offenses. In 2007, a report commissioned by the Presidency revealed that EHWs had been issued for offences such as possession of 0.45 grams of cannabis, possession of 3 ecstasy tablets, theft of two car tyres, driving under the influence of alcohol whose limit was not significantly exceeded and theft of a piglet.

The report concluded that it would be appropriate to have a discussion at EU level on the proportionate issuance of European arrest warrants. [28] « 3. (a) In the present case, a reference to a European arrest warrant must be interpreted as a reference to a European arrest warrant which fulfils the following conditions: 2. The requested person must be surrendered no later than ten days after the final decision on the execution of the arrest warrant. The Nordic countries have extradition laws with identical wording. (4) In addition, the following three Conventions, which deal in whole or in part with extradition, have been agreed between the Member States and form part of the Union acquis: the Convention of 19 June 1990 implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders(4) (concerning relations between Member States, the Contracting Parties to this Convention are the Convention of 10 March 1995 on simplified extradition procedures between the Member States of the European Union(5) and the Convention of 27 September 1996 on extradition between the Member States of the European Union(6). (5) The objective set by the Union to become an area of freedom, security and justice leads to the abolition of extradition between Member States and to the replacement by a system of surrender between judicial authorities. In addition, the introduction of a new, simplified system for the surrender of convicted or suspected persons for the purpose of enforcing or prosecuting criminal judgments will eliminate the complexity and risk of delay inherent in current extradition proceedings. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Framework Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(8) Decisions on the execution of the European arrest warrant should be subject to sufficient controls, which means that a judicial authority of the Member State in which the requested person was arrested must take the decision on his surrender. (9) The role of central authorities in the execution of a European arrest warrant should be limited to practical and administrative assistance. (10) The European arrest warrant mechanism is based on a high level of trust between Member States. . . .