•authority that executes EAW and is competent to decide on surrender;
The competent authority to decide on surrender is the County court in the place where the wanted person has his domicile, residence, or stay. If the wanted person does not have domicile, residence, or stay in the Republic of Croatia, then the competent County court is the County court in the place where the wanted person was arrested.
In exceptional cases, the County public prosecutor may refuse to execute an EAW if the prosecutor establishes that the offence in question is not a criminal offence under Croatian law. The public prosecutor's decision must be immediately forwarded to the investigating judge of the competent County court, which must confirm or revoke the decision within 48 hours of the arrest.
•the time limits for detention;
The detention of the requested person may last for the longest period until the final decision on the execution of the European arrest warrant is executed.
In cases where the requested person consents to his surrender, the decision on the execution of the European arrest warrant should be taken without delay, but no later than three days after consent has been given. The decision of the court may be appealed to a council, which must decide on the appeal within three days.
If the requested person has not consented to surrender, the decision on his or her surrender shall be rendered within sixty days after the arrest or the first interrogation.
If a decision on surrender cannot be rendered within the time limits, the court shall notify thereof the authority that issued the warrant, giving the reasons for the delay. In such a case, the time limit for rendering a decision on the surrender of the requested person shall be extended by a further thirty days.
If, due to exceptional circumstances, a decision on surrender cannot be rendered within the time limit, the court shall notify Eurojust thereof, giving the reasons for the delay.
•the scope of offences that allow surrender;
The competent court shall render a decision granting surrender without verification of double criminality if the issuing state has indicated that the offence for which the warrant was issued is on the List of offences (Article 2 (2) of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA) for which the check of double criminality is excluded and the competent court does not establish the existence of mandatory or optional grounds for refusing to surrender the wanted person.
the rules for the prosecution for other offences;
1. for acts punishable by the law of the issuing Member State by a custodial sentence for a maximum period of at least 12 months and if a detention order has been made against the person to whom the warrant relates.
2. for the execution of a prison sentence or other measure of deprivation of liberty is issued when a final judgment has been rendered imposing a prison sentence or other measure of deprivation of liberty for at least four months, or when the convicted person has at least four months of the sentence or other measure of deprivation of liberty remain to be served
In exceptional circumstances, when a European arrest warrant has been issued for several criminal offences, some of which do not meet the previously described conditions in terms of the length of the sentence or measure that may be imposed or has been imposed, the European arrest warrant may also be issued for those criminal offences.
•grounds for mandatory/optional refusal to surrender
MANDATORY GROUNDS
The court shall refuse to execute a European arrest warrant in the following cases:
1. if the European arrest warrant has been issued for an offence covered by amnesty in the Republic of Croatia, and a domestic court has jurisdiction under the law;
2. if the court is informed that the requested person has already been sentenced by a final judgment in a Member State in respect of the same offence, provided that the sentence has been served or is currently being served or it may no longer be executed under the law of the sentencing Member State;
3. if the requested person had not reached the age of 14 at the time the offence was committed;
OPTIONAL GROUNDS
The court may refuse to execute a European arrest warrant, guided by the principles of effective co-operation, expediency, and the right to a fair trial, taking into account the prevention of impunity, the suppression of crime, and the guarantee of the legal certainty of the wanted person:
1. if the issuing state of the European arrest warrant did not indicate that the criminal offence for which the warrant was issued is on the List of offences for which the check of double criminality is excluded (Article 2 (2) of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA) and the offence is punishable by a custodial sentence for a maximum period of at least one year or, where the final sentence has been passed, for a custodial sentence of at least four months, but the offence to which warrant relates does not constitute a criminal offence under the domestic law.
In relation to fiscal offences, the execution of a European arrest warrant shall not be refused solely on the ground that the domestic law does not impose the same kind of tax or duty or does not contain the same provisions as regards taxes, duties, customs or exchange regulations as the law of the issuing State;
2. if the person who is the subject of the European arrest warrant is being prosecuted in the Republic of Croatia for the same offence for which the European arrest warrant has been issued, unless the State Attorney and the competent authority of the issuing State have agreed
that criminal proceedings shall be conducted by a judicial authority of the issuing State;
3. if the domestic judicial authority has decided not to prosecute for the offence for which the
European arrest warrant has been issued because the suspect has fulfilled the obligations imposed on him or her as a condition to cease prosecution;
4. if the criminal prosecution or the execution of the criminal sanction is statute-barred according to domestic law, providing that Croatian judicial authorities have jurisdiction for that offence under the domestic criminal law;
5. if the court is informed that the requested person has been sentenced by a final judgment in a third State in respect of the same offence, provided that the sentence has been served or is currently being served or it may no longer be executed under the law of the sentencing State.
6. if the domestic judicial authority has decided either not to prosecute for the offence for which the European arrest warrant was issued or to discontinue proceedings, or if a final judgment has been passed upon the requested person in a Member State, in respect of the same offence;
7. if the European arrest warrant relates to offences which:
a) have been committed in whole or in part in the territory of the Republic of Croatia;
b) have been committed outside the territory of the issuing State and the domestic law does not allow prosecution for the same offence when committed outside the territory of the Republic of Croatia.
Also, the court may refuse to execute the European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of
executing a custodial sentence or measure involving deprivation of liberty imposed by a judgement rendered in absentia, unless it is clear from the information given on the standard form (Annex 1 of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA), in accordance with the law of the issuing State:
1. the requested person was, in due time and in person, summoned for the hearing and thereby
informed of the time and place of the hearing which resulted in the judgment being rendered in absentia or that he or she received official information of the time and place of the hearing in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware of the scheduled hearing, and was warned about the possibility of a judgement being rendered in absentia if he or she does not appear for the hearing;
2. the requested person was represented at the hearing by a defence counsel authorised by him
or her or appointed ex officio by the court;
3. the requested person, after being personally served with the judgement rendered in absentia
and being instructed about his or her right to a retrial, or an appeal, in which he or she would be entitled to participate and in which the facts would be reassessed and new evidence presented, and which might lead to the original judgement being varied, has expressly stated that he or she does not contest the judgement rendered in absentia, or did not request a retrial or submit an appeal within the stipulated time limit;
4. the requested person was not personally served with the judgement rendered in absentia, but will be personally served with it without delay after surrender to the authorities of the issuing State, and informed that he or she has the right to file a request for a retrial or lodge an appeal within the legally stipulated time limit, which could initiate the procedure described in item 3