EU instruments: The Framework Decisions Figure 2: Overview of the three Framework Decisions, the European Arrest Warrant and the Victims’ Rights Directive: duration from adoption to deadline for implementation/transposition as well as duration until at least 2/3 of EU Member States implemented/transposed the respective instrument Transfer of prisoners Probation and alternative sanctions European Supervision Order Victims’ Rights Directive European Arrest Warrant 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 ? 2016 2018 Legend Duration from adoption to implementation/transposition deadline Source: FRA, 2016 There have been significant developments since the Commission’s 2014 implementation assessment, with only a handful or fewer Member States not yet having formally implemented the instruments. The European Judicial Network provides updated information online on the status of implementation.18 As of 1 May 2016, Bulgaria and Ireland had not fully implemented the Framework Decision on transfer of prisoners (implementation processes are ongoing in both countries). For the Framework Decision on probation and alternative sanctions, only Ireland had not completed implementation, but this is pending (the United Kingdom is not taking part). Twenty-three EU Member States had implemented the Framework Decision on the ESO, with an additional three (Cyprus, Ireland, and Luxembourg) being in the process of implementation and two (Belgium and Bulgaria) having yet to implement it. According to the European Commission, wide variations exist in the transposition of some of the provisions, such as those related to the role of the person concerned in the transfer process, the principle that sentences should 18 Duration until at least 2/3 of EU Member States had transposed or implemented the instrument (e.g. 19/28 even if 25 only in 2004) European Judicial Network (EJN), Judicial Library. not be adapted in the executing state, and the application of grounds for refusal. For example, some Member States have added additional grounds based on which executing states are to refuse transfers. Adding grounds for refusal and making these mandatory seems to be contrary both to the letter and spirit of the Framework Decisions.19 EU Member States have also issued declarations regarding some provisions of the decisions. The Framework Decision on transfer of prisoners in Article 7 (1) on double criminality lists offences that must be recognised by executing states without verification of double criminality; this will not be applied by Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, and Slovenia. Some EU Member States have also declared that the decisions will only be applicable to judgments issued after the date of entry into force or the date of implementation. With regard to the Framework Decision on the ESO, Lithuania, Poland and 19 European Commission (2014), p. 10. 27