CYIL vol. 11 (2020)

MIROSLAV KUBÍČEK CYIL 11 (2020) retire and vote on the verdict. The regional court’s decision may be appealed by the person sought or by the prosecutor (in both cases with suspensive effect). The appeal is decided by the high court. The high court may dismiss the appeal or, if it grants the appeal, it may decide on admissibility of the extradition itself or, if the information (evidence) gathered by the prosecutor and/or the regional court is insufficient and obtaining the missing information would prolong the appeals proceedings too much, send the case back to the regional court with binding instructions to obtain such missing information (or even to return the case to the prosecutor to do so) and decide again (with possibility of appeal against such new decision). When the court decision becomes final, the case is submitted to the Ministry. The Minister of Justice may grant the extradition only if the courts found the extradition admissible (Section 97(1) of the Act). Exceptionally, the case can be submitted by the Minister to the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic (even if the regional court and/or the high court found the extradition admissible) for review (Section 95(5) of the Act) if the Minister has doubts about the court’s decision. The Minister can do so on his or her own motion or on the basis of a written petition that the person sought may send to the Ministry (the case, including any written petitions of the person sought, is always reviewed and further steps are proposed by the International Department for Criminal Matters of the Ministry, which acts as the Central Authority of the Czech Republic for, inter alia, extradition matters; for these purposes, the Ministry may also request additional information). Another avenue of defence given the person sought under domestic law of the Czech Republic is the right to file a constitutional complaint. The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic accepts constitutional complaints both against court decisions on admissibility of extradition and against the Minister’s decision on granting extradition 70 . However, consideration of grounds for refusal of extradition should be challenged through constitutional complaint against the court decision on admissibility of extradition. The constitutional complaint does not have automatic suspensive effect but the Constitutional Court may, upon motion of the person sought, grant suspensive effect under Section 79(2) of the Act No. 182/1993 of the Collection of Laws, on the Constitutional Court, as amended. If suspensive effect is granted, the Minister cannot grant extradition and, if extradition had already been granted before the constitutional complaint was filed, the person cannot be physically surrendered to the requesting party’s authorities (but, for the duration of suspensive effect, the deadline for extradition custody 71 is also suspended – Section 101(6)(b) of the Act). The Constitutional Court may dismiss the constitutional complaint or, if it grants the constitutional complaint, it may send the case back to the regional/high/Supreme court or to the Minister with binding instructions to decide again (with all the possibilities of fresh appeal or constitutional complaint against such new decisions). An important safeguard in extradition proceedings is the mandatory representation by legal counsel (lawyer) 72 , for the person sought, from the beginning of the proceedings 70 See binding opinion of the plenary session of the Constitutional Court of 13 August 2013, ref. No. Pl.ÚS-st. 37/13. 71 Custody pending physical surrender of the person, whose extradition was granted, to the requesting party’s authorities; according to Section 101(5) of the Act, this type of custody is otherwise limited to three months, extendable by the regional court, upon motion of the Ministry, up to six months. 72 Representation of the person sought by a legal counsel does not in any way limit the rights of the person to defend themselves.

114