High Court orders surrender of Polish national convicted in his absence to Poland, finding that recent legislative amendments (which apply retrospectively to the governing law) concerning individuals who had been tried in absentia were procedural rather than substantive in nature and that any procedural difficulties in a warrant could be cured by way of additional information from the issuing State.
European arrest warrant – Poland – s.16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 – whether amendments to s.16(1) and s.45 of 2003 Act effected by the European Arrest Warrant (Application to Third Countries and Amendment) and Extradition (Amendment) Act 2012 have retrospective effect, and if so, to what extent – whether the warrant in the present case is in the correct form having regard to those amendments – Art.5(1) of Framework Decision 2002/584 – trial in absentia – waiver of right to be present at trial – Art.2(3) of Framework Decision 2009/299 – now a condition precedent to the making of surrender order that court be satisfied that European arrest warrant states certain matters required by s.45 of the Act of 2003 as amended by s. 23 of the Act of 2012 – according to new s.45, the executing Member State is obliged not to surrender a person who has been tried in absentia unless the European arrest warrant "indicates" certain matters – executing judicial authority retains competence to assess whether the proceedings conducted in absentia in the issuing Member State complied with standards mandated under the E.C.H.R. – retrospectivity – whether amendments flowing from 2012 Act apply retrospectively to warrant issued and endorsed prior to commencement of Act – amendments procedural in nature rather than substantive – seeking additional information can remedy the effect of the retrospective nature of legislation.