Procedural aspects: Information and Consent penitentiary institution receives a judgment’s execution order. A convicted person should have the legal consequences of the transfer explained to them.272 For example, in the Ilguciems prison, convicted foreign citizens receive an excerpt from the Criminal Procedure Law as well as an explanation of their right to express the wish to serve the sentence in the country of their citizenship or permanent residence (it is unclear whether this is provided in any language other than Latvian). If a convicted person has additional questions about these rights, they can sign up for a meeting with Registration Unit (Uzskaites daļa) officials.273 In some Member States, information leaflets in various languages are distributed among prisoners (Austria, Belgium, Germany and Finland). In others, law enforcement or judicial authorities may be in charge of informing individuals about the transfer option (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, France and Slovenia). Even fewer Member States have established such procedures for the Framework Decision on probation and alternative sanctions and the Framework Decision on the ESO. It appears that, where there are no procedures for providing information about the possibility to transfer, affected persons must rely on the goodwill of lawyers or others, seek information from official websites, or obtain it through the word of mouth. 6.2. Right to interpretation assistance when considering transfers The three Framework Decisions concern foreigners, who may not speak the language of the state in which they were the subject of criminal proceedings. The Framework Decisions make only cursory reference to the issue of linguistic understanding. The Framework Decision on transfer of prisoners only imposes an obligation on the issuing state to inform sentenced persons, in a language they understand, that it has been decided to forward the judgment together with the certificate (Article 6 (4)). The decision refers to a language the sentenced person understands, and not their mother tongue. This conforms with ECtHR case law.274 The Framework Decision on transfer of prisoners does not address interpretation assistance or translation of pending proceedings. Article 23 provides that the certificates that accompany judgments shall be translated into the official language, or one of the official languages, 272 Latvia, Criminal Procedure Law (Kriminālprocesa likums), 21 April 2005, Section 819, para. 1. 273 Latvia, Representative of the Ilguciems prison security and registration unit. 274 ECtHR, Brozicek v. Italy, No. 10964/84, 19 December 1989, paras. 38–42. of the executing state; however, this provision serves the purpose of facilitating international cooperation and not providing information to the sentenced person. The two other decisions similarly provide that the certificates should be translated into the official language, or one of the official languages, of the executing state (Framework Decision on probation and alternative sanctions in Article 21, and Framework Decision on the ESO in Article 24). There is no reference to the necessity of informing the person in a language they understand. FRA ACTIVITY FRA report on rights in criminal procedures FRA has issued a  report on procedural rights in criminal procedures in parallel with this study on the three Framework Decisions. That report explores the legal and practical situation of suspects and accused persons in relation to the right to interpretation and translation as well as the right to information on rights and charges (covered by Directive 2010/64 of 20 October 2010 and Directive 2012/13 of 22 May 2012). The rights provided for in these two EU instruments apply during criminal proceedings, and may thus be applicable to the ESO in some circumstances. However, they do not apply to transfer proceedings after final convictions. The logic underlying the right to be informed about suspicions or criminal charges and to some form of mechanism to ensure that suspects or accused persons have understood the message could also be applied to information for detainees on the possibilities and consequences of transfers. This is touched upon in Section 6.5, which covers verifications of suspects’/sentenced persons’ understanding of the transfer process. The Opinions outlined in this report also draw parallels between the  EU legislation on criminal proceedings and transfer proceedings. Source: FRA (2016), Rights of suspected and accused persons across the EU: translation, interpretation and information, Luxembourg, Publications Office Possible entitlements to assistance from interpreters would therefore stem from domestic law. However, parallel efforts by the EU on interpretation and translation in criminal procedures as well as on understanding criminal charges – addressed in the box highlighting a new FRA report on rights in criminal procedures – underscore the usefulness of providing language assistance and quality control for such assistance to potential transferees. Figure 14 shows which EU Member States provide prisoners with a right to interpretation and translation during transfer proceedings. FRA’s research shows that 16 states provide interpretation assistance for sentenced persons, either while 87