By Piotr Stepulak (European Prison Litigation Network)
A German court refused to execute a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued by Poland, due to suspicions of systemic deficiencies exposing prisoners to ill-treatment in the Polish prison system. The court based its assessment on reports from the Polish NPM, which documented prisoners’ ill-treatment in at least 15 prisons, and saw “no indication” that the Polish authorities have remedied the systemic deficiencies identified therein.
On 13 May 2026, The Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) refused to execute an EAW concerning a Polish national requested by the Polish authorities for prosecution. The court pointed to evidence submitted by the requested person suggesting systemic deficiencies in the Polish prison system exposing prisoners to physical ill-treatment, and to the absence of verifiable and detailed assurances provided by the Polish authorities that the deficiencies have been remedied.
In particular, the court referred to reports produced by the Polish National Preventive Mechanism against Torture (KMPT), operating within the Polish Ombudsperson’s office, which the German judiciary described as “capable of providing objective, reliable, precise and duly updated information about detention conditions in Poland” (para. 2).
The KMPT reports documented torture or physical ill-treatment of prisoners by prison staff in at least 13 prisons in 2022-2024 (Barczewo, Tarnów, Koronowo, Białystok, Potulice, Sztum, Strzelce Opolskie, Warszawa-Białołęka, Grudziądz, Włocławek, Łowicz, Wojkowice, and Gdańsk), as well as, in 2026, the prisons of Warszawa-Grochów and Suwałki, one of which involved a fatal outcome. The reports were accompanied by photographs documenting specific cases, including a prisoner sleeping on a bare bed in handcuffs with the cell light kept on and woken every two hours, prisoners in full physical restraint or having their cuffed hands twisted behind their backs, a prisoner held by the throat during a body search, and an iron cage described by the court as equipment “by its very design intended for the inhuman treatment of prisoners” (para. 32). Furthermore, KMPT reports documented a psychological consultation between a prisoner and a psychologist in a security cell and under significant staff presence.
The scale of the phenomenon led the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court to declare that it can be assumed “that comparable deficiencies also exist in other prisons” of Poland (para. 33). Due to systemic nature of the suspected phenomenon, concerning at least 15 prisons (out of 171), even the specific assurances concerning the pre-trial detention centre in which the requested person would be help upon surrender (Warszawa-Służewiec), which was not mentioned in the KMPT reports, could not be considered “reliable” by the German court (para. 40).
The Polish authorities have been unable to dispel the German court’s suspicions of the “not inconsiderable extent” of prisoners’ ill-treatment in Poland (para. 33). In particular, they have merely provided a general assurance that the requested person will be held in human-rights compliant conditions, and that ill-treatment on prisoners is illegal and therefore subject to criminal and disciplinary sanctions. They have expressly declined to provide detailed information on the prison to which the requested person would be transferred in the event of his conviction, since such decisions is taken on the basis of several criteria by specific prison commissions. They added that they saw no legal basis for providing such guarantees and that, in any event, providing them would “give the impression that human rights violations in certain facilities were permissible and tolerated in Poland” (para. 14).
Seeing “no indication that the Polish authorities have remedied the systemic deficiencies identified” (para. 39) and being unconvinced by the limited assurances provided by Poland, the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court rejected the surrender request.
Interestingly, in doing so, it departed from an earlier decision from December 2024, also concerning EAW proceedings to Poland, in which the surrender was considered admissible, provided that the requested person would not be held in three specific prisons. The court found that the cumulative KMPT evidence now disclosed deficiencies of such scope that rendered such measure impractical in this case.
The European Prison Litigation Network (EPLN) and its members and partners monitor developments in domestic prison law across Europe and provide concise analyses of the most significant changes affecting prisoners’ rights at national level. These updates are intended to support practitioners in identifying emerging European trends, drawing on comparative experiences, and strengthening their legal practice and advocacy in defence of prisoners’ rights.
Funded by the Robert Carr Fund. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the Robert Carr Fund, which cannot be held responsible for them.
