CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 21 mars 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sF2E0A612 { margin-top:48pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 11 April 2023   SECOND SECTION Application no. 36356/22 Waldemar Slawomir KNIHINICKI against Norway lodged on 2 July 2022 communicated on 21 March 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the surrender (extradition) of the applicant from Norway to Poland on the basis of a European arrest warrant issued in 2010 on suspicion of his involvement in offences relating to the import of amphetamines to Norway from Poland between 2004 and 2006. The applicant was arrested in Norway in 2020 in connection with an investigation in another case. On 17 December 2020 and 16 May 2021 the police applied to the courts for an examination of whether the conditions for surrender were met. The Buskerud District Court held in an order of 8 October 2021 that the conditions were met; that order was upheld on appeal by the Borgarting High Court on 21 October 2021. On further appeal the Supreme Court’s Appeals Committee decided to refer the case in part to the Supreme Court sitting in a five-judge chamber formation. On 29 April 2022 the Supreme Court gave an order finding that the conditions for surrender had been met. Under Article 6 of the Convention the applicant complains of a violation of his right to a fair trial on grounds relating to the risk of a flagrant denial of justice in Poland upon being surrendered.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention on grounds of the applicant having risked suffering a flagrant denial of a fair trial in Poland following his extradition (see, for example, Soering v. the United Kingdom , 7 July 1989, § 113, Series   A no. 161; Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, §§ 80-83 and 88-91, ECHR 2005 ‑ I; Stapleton v. Ireland (dec.), no.   56588/07, § 25, 4 May 2010; Othman   (Abu   Qatada) v. the United Kingdom , no. 8139/09, §§ 258-62, ECHR 2012 (extracts); Harkins v. the United Kingdom (dec.) [GC], no.   71537/14, §§ 62-65, 15 June 2017; and Pirozzi v. Belgium , no. 21055/11, §§ 57-64, 17 April 2018)? REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS The Government are additionally asked to provide the Court with the decision(s) on the applicant’s surrender (extradition) taken subsequently to the Supreme Court’s decision of 29 April 2022 (in which that Court concluded that the conditions for surrendering the applicant had been met), and any documents containing the applicant’s submissions made to domestic authorities in that regard, including any statement of appeal.