EU Court: Belgium Must Serve Sentences When Extradition Refused

In a landmark ruling delivered on Thursday, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has determined that Belgium cannot leave convicted persons in legal limbo after refusing their extradition. When Belgian courts refuse to surrender an individual under a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) due to the risk of inhuman or degrading prison conditions abroad, Belgium must take active steps to execute the sentence on its own territory, as reported by RTBF.

The Cases That Triggered the Ruling

The ruling stems from a preliminary question referred by the Belgian Court of Cassation. Two separate European Arrest Warrants were at issue: one from Romania seeking the surrender of a Romanian national residing in Belgium, and another from Greece requesting a Belgian citizen living in Belgium. In both cases, Belgian appellate courts refused to execute the warrants, finding that surrendering the individuals would expose them to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment due to overcrowded and poor conditions in Romanian and Greek prisons.

This created a fundamental legal dilemma. The Belgian Court of Cassation asked the CJEU whether, after refusing extradition on fundamental rights grounds, Belgian authorities must—or may—execute the sentences themselves to prevent impunity.

The CJEU’s Answer

The CJEU answered unequivocally: yes. To preserve the security of the European area of freedom, security, and justice, Belgium is required to actively seek that convicted persons serve their sentences. The Court held that Belgian judicial authorities must use EU judicial cooperation instruments, taking the initiative to request that Romania and Greece transmit the original judgments so the sentences can be enforced in Belgian prisons.

As La Libre Belgique reported, the ruling specifies that while executing a sentence in another state generally requires the convicted person’s consent, this consent is not required if the individual deliberately fled the sentencing state to evade punishment.

Closing a Legal Gap

This ruling addresses a critical gap in the European Arrest Warrant framework. In 2016, the CJEU established in the landmark Aranyosi and Căldăraru judgment that executing judicial authorities must postpone surrender if there is evidence of systemic deficiencies in prison conditions creating a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment. However, that decision left unresolved what happens after extradition is refused—creating what legal experts call a “gap of impunity.”

If a state refuses to surrender a convicted person due to prison conditions in the requesting state but has no mechanism to execute the sentence itself, the convicted person effectively goes free. Thursday’s ruling closes this gap by imposing a positive obligation on the executing state to ensure the sentence is served.

Practical Implications for Belgium

The ruling carries significant practical consequences for Belgian authorities. Belgian prisons, already facing overcrowding challenges, may now need to accommodate additional inmates whose sentences were originally to be served in Romania and Greece. The Belgian Ministry of Justice will need to plan for the reception and management of these additional detainees.

Furthermore, Belgian judicial authorities must shift from a passive to an active role, proactively requesting the transfer of judgments from issuing states rather than waiting for them to be submitted. This represents a meaningful administrative and procedural change.

Broader EU Implications

While this ruling specifically addresses Belgium, the legal principle applies across the European Union. Other member states that have refused EAWs on similar grounds—regarding prison conditions in Hungary, Bulgaria, Italy, or elsewhere—may now face comparable obligations.

The ruling may also indirectly pressure states like Romania and Greece to improve prison conditions. When the consequence of poor detention standards is that other member states must bear the cost of incarceration, the incentive to address systemic deficiencies increases significantly.

What Comes Next

The ruling does not specify a deadline for implementation. The practical timeline depends on the transmission of judgments from Romania and Greece to Belgian authorities. Belgian courts will also need to navigate the consent exception, determining in future cases whether individuals “deliberately fled” the sentencing state—a question that may generate further legal proceedings.

For now, the CJEU has sent a clear message: fundamental rights protection and effective criminal justice are not mutually exclusive. Member states must uphold both, even when doing so requires significant administrative effort and resources.