Constitutional Complaint in Extradition Law

Function in extradition law

Because no appeal lies against the admissibility decision of the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht, OLG), the constitutional complaint under Article 93(1) no. 4a of the Basic Law and Sections 90 ff. BVerfGG is the requested person's only legal remedy against the extradition decision. The Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfG) examines whether the decision violates the requested person's fundamental rights — in particular Article 2(2) of the Basic Law (liberty), Article 1(1) of the Basic Law (human dignity), Article 16(2) of the Basic Law (prohibition on extraditing one's own nationals), as well as the rights deriving from Article 3 ECHR in conjunction with Article 1 of the Basic Law.

Interim injunction

What is decisive in practice is the application for an interim injunction under Section 32 BVerfGG. As a rule, it must be filed before the scheduled surrender. The Federal Constitutional Court can suspend enforcement of the OLG's decision (the surrender) until it rules on the merits. In urgent cases, a decision is possible within hours.

Substantiation

The Federal Constitutional Court sets high requirements for substantiation. It is not enough to allege legal errors — the complaint must set out which specific fundamental right has been violated and in what way. Successful constitutional complaints in extradition law usually single out one or two precise objections (a violation of Article 3 ECHR through an inadequate review of detention conditions, a failure to obtain assurances, or the like) and support them with current sources of information.

← Back to the glossary index