In brief. Speed is the defining feature of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). Where the requested person consents to surrender, the final decision should be taken within 10 days; where they contest it, the decision should come within 60 days, extendable by a further 30 days in exceptional circumstances (art. 17 of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, implemented in Italy by Law 69/2005). Once surrender is decided, the physical handover should occur within 10 days. These deadlines shape detention, defence strategy and the consequences of any delay — and missing them does not, by itself, extinguish the warrant.

Why the EAW is built on deadlines

The whole logic of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is to replace slow, diplomatic extradition with a fast judicial procedure between EU Member States. Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA (“FD”), implemented in Italy by Law 22 April 2005, no. 69 (“L. 69/2005”) and amended by D.Lgs. 10/2021, fixes short, binding-in-principle time limits so that a person is not held in limbo. Understanding the clock is essential: it determines how long the requested person can be detained, when the defence must act, and what leverage delay can create.

The decision deadlines: 10, 60 and 90 days

Art. 17 FD sets the framework, transposed into arts. 14, 17, 22 and 22-bis L. 69/2005.

  • Consent to surrender — 10 days. If the requested person consents to being surrendered (and, where applicable, renounces the speciality rule), the final decision on execution of the EAW should be taken within 10 days of consent.
  • Contested surrender — 60 days. If the person does not consent, the final decision should be taken within 60 days of the arrest.
  • Extension — a further 30 days. In specific cases where the 60-day limit cannot be met, it may be extended by 30 days (the “60+30” rule), giving a total of up to 90 days, with the issuing authority being informed of the reasons.

In the Italian system the internal deadlines are much shorter:

  • validation of a police arrest: within 48 hours of receipt of the arrest report (art. 13);
  • with consent: hearing within 4 days of consent, decision by order (extendable by up to 3 days); appeal to the Court of Cassation within 3 days (arts. 14 and 22(5-bis));
  • without consent: judgment of the Court of Appeal within 15 days of the execution of the measure or of the arrest, extendable by up to 10 days (art. 17); appeal to the Court of Cassation within 5 days, on points of law only; the Cassation decides within 10 days of receiving the file (art. 22).

If the final decision is not taken within 60 days (or 10 days after consent), the Court must inform the Ministry of Justice, which informs the issuing authority; after a further 30 days, Eurojust is informed (art. 22-bis).

The surrender (handover) deadline: 10 days

Deciding to execute the EAW is not the end. Art. 23 FD requires the physical surrender of the person as soon as possible and, in any event, within 10 days of the final decision. If circumstances beyond the control of either State prevent handover, a new date is agreed and surrender must take place within 10 days of that new date. Where serious humanitarian reasons exist (for example, a risk to the person’s life or health), surrender may be temporarily postponed until those reasons cease.

What happens if the 10-day handover lapses

This is one of the few points where a missed deadline has a hard consequence: if the person is still in custody after the handover deadlines have expired, they must be released (art. 23(5) FD; art. 23(5) L. 69/2005, unless the failure is attributable to the person). The warrant itself is not annulled, but the detention loses its legal basis.

Detention during the procedure

When a person is arrested on an EAW in Italy, the Court of Appeal must decide on precautionary detention (custody or alternative measures) much as in domestic proceedings. The key principles:

  • detention is not automatic — the court assesses flight risk and applies the least restrictive adequate measure;
  • the time spent in custody under the EAW procedure is deducted from any sentence to be served in the issuing State (art. 26 FD);
  • the requested person has the right to a lawyer both in the executing State (Italy) and, under Directive 2013/48/EU (art. 9(5-bis) L. 69/2005), the right to appoint a lawyer in the issuing State to assist the Italian defence.

Because liberty is at stake from day one, the detention decision is often the first battleground, well before the merits of refusal are argued.

Consequences of delay

A common and important question is whether breaching the 60/90-day decision deadline kills the EAW. The answer, under settled CJEU case law, is no.

  • Decision deadlines (art. 17) are not, by themselves, grounds to release or to refuse. In Lanigan (C-237/15 PPU), the CJEU held that expiry of the art. 17 time limits does not discharge the executing State from its duty to decide, nor does it automatically require release. The person may continue to be held provided the overall duration of detention is not excessive under art. 6 of the Charter.
  • But detention must remain proportionate. The longer the procedure runs beyond the deadlines, the stronger the argument that continued custody is no longer proportionate, which can support release with alternative measures pending the decision.
  • Italy adds a statutory backstop. Once the 60+30-day limits have expired, the Court of Appeal must check whether custody is still strictly necessary and proportionate; if the delay continues unjustifiably, and in any case 90 days after those limits have expired, custody must be revoked and replaced, where needed, by non-custodial measures (art. 22-bis(3)-(4) L. 69/2005).
  • Handover deadlines (art. 23) DO bite. As noted, expiry of the 10-day surrender window while the person is in custody requires their release.

The practical takeaway: delay rarely defeats the warrant outright, but it is a genuine lever for securing release from custody pending the outcome.

How ILA manages the EAW clock

From the moment of arrest, ILA maps every deadline in the case: the consent/contest decision, the 60+30 decision envelope, the Cassation timeline and the 10-day handover window. We use the clock both defensively — pressing for release where detention has become disproportionate — and offensively, gathering the country-specific evidence and assurances needed before the decision deadline expires. Coordination with counsel in the issuing State, as guaranteed by Directive 2013/48/EU, is built into the workflow from day one.

FAQ

How long can the surrender procedure take under an EAW? If the person consents, the final decision should be made within 10 days. If they contest, the decision should come within 60 days of arrest, extendable by a further 30 days in exceptional cases (the 60+30 rule). In Italy the Court of Appeal itself must rule within 15 days (extendable by up to 10), and a Cassation appeal must be lodged within 5 days. Physical handover should then occur within 10 days of the final decision.

Will I be released if the 60-day deadline is missed? Not automatically. Under CJEU case law (Lanigan), expiry of the decision deadline does not end the procedure or require release by itself, but continued detention must remain proportionate; in Italy, custody must in any case be revoked 90 days after the 60+30-day limits have expired (art. 22-bis L. 69/2005). If you are still in custody after the 10-day handover deadline expires, you must be released.

Am I detained for the whole EAW procedure? Not necessarily. Detention is not automatic: the Court of Appeal assesses flight risk and can apply alternative measures. Any time spent in custody is later deducted from the sentence in the issuing State.

For how surrender proceedings work overall and the grounds on which they can be resisted, see our pillar guide to the European Arrest Warrant, or reach the firm directly through the Contact page.