Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
2 BvR 702/17 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2017:rk20170413.2bvr070217 Generato dall'IA

Extradition to Romania; failure to substantiate constitutional complaint and missed deadline for filing underlying arrest warrants and assurances

Numero d'incarto 2 BvR 702/17
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court refused to accept the constitutional complaint for decision, leaving the lower court order for extradition to Romania in force. The dispute concerned an application challenging an extradition order, where the applicant argued that the conditions of detention in the destination country violated their fundamental rights. The Court dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, holding that the applicant failed to meet the statutory requirements for substantiation under § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 and § 92 BVerfGG. Specifically, the complaint lacked sufficient engagement with the challenged decision, and the applicant failed to submit essential documents—including court filings, European Arrest Warrants, and official assurances regarding detention conditions—within the mandatory filing deadline prescribed by § 93 Abs. 1 Satz 1 BVerfGG.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 92 BVerfGG, § 93 Abs. 1 Satz 1 BVerfGG, § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG; Extradition to Romania; failure to substantiate constitutional complaint and missed deadline for filing underlying arrest warrants and assurances: The dispute concerned an application challenging an extradition order, where the applicant argued that the conditions of detention in the destination country violated their fundamental rights. The Court dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, holding that the applicant failed to meet the statutory requirements for substantiation under § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 and § 92 BVerfGG. Specifically, the complaint lacked sufficient engagement with the challenged decision, and the applicant failed to submit essential documents—including court filings, European Arrest Warrants, and official assurances regarding detention conditions—within the mandatory filing deadline prescribed by § 93 Abs. 1 Satz 1 BVerfGG.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
ordine d'arresto per estradizione requisito costituzionale presupposti legali termine processuale perentorio ricorso costituzionale all'estero diritto di essere arrestato

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 92 BVerfGG
Cited alongside § 23 as part of the procedural requirements for substantiating the constitutional complaint.
§ 93 Abs. 1 Satz 1 BVerfGG
Cited to establish that the applicant failed to submit essential documents within the mandatory filing deadline.
§ 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG
Cited as the statutory basis for the requirements regarding the substantiation of the constitutional complaint, leading to the refusal to accept it.

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
BVerfGE 130, 1
BVerfGE 82, 43
BVerfGE 82, 43 ; 86, 122 ; 88, 40 ; 105, 252 ; 130, 1 ).
Generato dall'IA
2 BvR 2110/21
Failure to substantiate constitutional complaint on updated detention conditions in extradition to Romania renders it inadmissible
2 BvR 1239/23
Constitutional complaint in extradition proceedings rejected for failure to plead compliance with the statutory deadline and violation of the subsidiarity principle
2 BvQ 9/20, 2 BvR 307/20
Constitutional complaint against extradition authorization for inadequate detention condition assurances and failure to apply human dignity guarantee
2 BvR 1991/16
Extradition via European Arrest Warrant: non-acceptance of constitutional complaint for insufficient substantiation of substantive arguments
2 BvR 1845/18
Interim suspension of extradition to Romania pending constitutional review; validity of interim order issued without reasoned grounds under BVerfGG

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG

Cited as the statutory basis for the requirements regarding the substantiation of the constitutional complaint, leading to the refusal to accept it.

§ 92 BVerfGG

Cited alongside § 23 as part of the procedural requirements for substantiating the constitutional complaint.

§ 93 Abs. 1 Satz 1 BVerfGG

Cited to establish that the applicant failed to submit essential documents within the mandatory filing deadline.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Nichtannahmebeschluss mit Tenorbegründung: Auslieferung des Beschwerdeführers nach Rumänien - Unzureichende Substantiierung der Verfassungsbeschwerde

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen, weil sie nicht den aus § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2, § 92 BVerfGG folgenden Anforderungen an ihre Begründung genügt (vgl. BVerfGE 130, 1 m.w.N.). Es fehlt an einer ausreichenden inhaltlichen Auseinandersetzung mit der angegriffenen Entscheidung (vgl. BVerfGE 82, 43 ; 86, 122 ; 88, 40 ; 105, 252 ; 130, 1 ). Zudem hat der Beschwerdeführer insbesondere seine Schriftsätze aus dem fachgerichtlichen Verfahren gar nicht und die Europäischen Haftbefehle sowie die Zusicherung der rumänischen Behörden in Bezug auf die Haftbedingungen in Rumänien nicht innerhalb der Verfassungsbeschwerdefrist (vgl. § 93 Abs. 1 Satz 1 BVerfGG) vorgelegt oder in hinreichender Weise wiedergegeben.

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.