Criminal detention and alternatives: fundamental rights aspects in EU cross-border transfers
the objectives of the Framework Decision on transfer of prisoners. This Framework Decision emphasises
the need to assess whether a transfer would indeed
facilitate the sentenced person’s social rehabilitation.
If a transfer would not do so, a state is free to refuse
the transfer. Hence the Framework Decision itself does
not assume that transfers to the home country always
positively affect social rehabilitation. Certain factors
need to be considered, such as the capacity to facilitate
social rehabilitation during detention, family and social
ties, linguistic and cultural ties, and place of residence
after release. This also permits supporting particular
fundamental rights, such as rights related to family life,
work and education.
FRA Opinion 3
It should not be assumed that social rehabilitation
is only possible in the offender’s state of
nationality. In applying the three Framework
Decisions, EU Member States must remain true
to the instruments’ objectives, particularly social
rehabilitation, and avoid simply sending persons
back to ‘their home country’. Social rehabilitation
prospects should be assessed on a case-bycase basis, and the capacity to facilitate social
rehabilitation during detention, for instance,
must be considered.
The principle of mutual recognition underpinning the
three Framework Decisions hinges on mutual trust –
a sufficient level of confidence between Member States
as to the level and quality of justice systems. When
assessing fundamental rights implications, states have
clear guidelines from the jurisprudence of the ECtHR
and the CJEU. FRA’s analysis of recent CJEU judgments in
particular underscores that EU Member States are prohibited from transferring people to places where their
fundamental rights will be at risk, especially their right
to dignity and to freedom from inhuman and degrading conditions. It is particularly important that the individual situation in a Member State is strictly evaluated.
52
FRA Opinion 4
In light of international human rights and EU
fundamental rights standards and jurisprudence,
EU Member States are prohibited from transferring
people to places where their fundamental rights
will be at risk, especially their right to dignity
and to freedom from inhuman and degrading
conditions. It is particularly important that
individual situations are strictly evaluated when
the issue is raised, and when practitioners – such
as judges – are required to determine detention
conditions in the state to which a person is to be
transferred. This is particularly true when there is
objective evidence of systemic shortcomings in
a given state’s detention facilities.
In this context, the EU – in cooperation with the
Member States – should consider making much
more easily available information on detention
conditions (as well as on alternatives) in all EU
Member States, drawing on existing international, European, and national monitoring reports.
This would include a more objective, accessible
and operational information system that could
also be coupled with indicators on detention conditions and benchmarks for such conditions, allowing for greater clarity on when transfers could
be made without fundamental rights concerns.
This would be a useful tool for judges and others who need to make decisions about detention
conditions in other Member States.
Moreover, the availability of EU funds could
be linked to recommendations by monitoring
mechanisms – such as the European Committee
on the Prevention of Torture (CPT) – on detention
conditions, so as to create incentives, and
realistic opportunities, for addressing identified
shortcomings as a priority.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents