Extradition from Germany: How the Procedure Works and What an Extradition Lawyer Does

Which legal route governs a request received by Germany?

The principal statute is the Gesetz über die internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen (IRG, Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters), in its consolidated version most recently amended on 10 February 2026. Section 1 IRG gives directly applicable treaties priority over inconsistent ordinary statutory rules. The lawyer must identify the requesting country and instrument before calculating any custody deadline or explaining which documents should arrive.

A request from the United States or Türkiye is not an EAW because arrest occurred in Germany. Convention declarations and reservations may matter; a historical reservation limited to Berlin ceased in 1990. A police alert is not a final surrender decision. See extradition versus EAW surrender.

Who makes the two decisions, and which district has the file?

German law separates judicial admissibility (Zulässigkeit) from authorisation (Bewilligung). Under §§12–13 IRG, an OLG ordinarily decides whether extradition is permitted, while the prosecution office attached to that OLG prepares the application and carries out an authorised handover. Authorisation of foreign cooperation falls under §74 IRG: federal ministerial competence may be delegated through arrangements with the Länder. Accordingly, the lawyer must establish the authority actually empowered to authorise this request rather than assume that an OLG judgment itself orders the police to transfer the person.

Section 14 generally places the case in the district where the person is caught for extradition, or, if not caught, is first located. An arrest in Berlin may therefore lead to the Kammergericht; an arrest within Frankfurt's OLG district ordinarily concerns OLG Frankfurt am Main and its prosecution office. The practical court contacts, local access and district-specific procedure belong to the separate Berlin and Frankfurt guides.

For an EAW, the two-stage structure has an important additional step. Before the OLG's admissibility ruling, the authorising authority must state whether it intends to invoke the optional obstacles in §83b IRG. Under §79(2), a decision not to invoke them is subject to OLG review during the ordinary §29 procedure. Simplified surrender changes that scrutiny; it must not be described as a harmless shortcut.

What happens between the foreign request and handover?

For a non-EAW request, §10 IRG ordinarily requires a foreign arrest warrant or equivalent judicial document, or an enforceable custodial judgment, together with the applicable criminal-law provisions. In an EAW case, §83a specifies the information the warrant must contain, including identity, issuing authority, conduct, legal classification and penalty. The OLG can require more material under §30 and may hold an oral hearing, but it need not conduct a full German criminal trial on whether the foreign prosecution will ultimately prove guilt.

An arrest in Germany: why the following day matters

Whether police provisionally arrest someone or execute an OLG extradition warrant, §§21–22 IRG require prompt production before a judge at the nearest Amtsgericht, no later than the day following arrest. This is a first-appearance rule, not a promise that the complete extradition case will be decided by then. The local judge addresses identity and nationality, the right to counsel and the choice to speak or remain silent about the allegation, and asks whether there are objections to the requested extradition or detention. Section 22(2) permits the Amtsgericht judge to complete the examination no later than the day after presentation; the presentation deadline and examination deadline must not be confused.

Under §40 IRG, representation is compulsory where the requested person has been arrested; if no lawyer is already acting, a lawyer must be appointed without delay. That is stronger than saying a lawyer is merely available on request. The appointment is a procedural safeguard, not proof that any particular private law firm has been instructed. Where communication is difficult, counsel should promptly raise the need for effective language assistance and ensure that the person understands the distinction between factual identification and any consent to simplified surrender.

Family members should record the arrest date and place, confirmed detention location, case number, citizenship documents, foreign decisions and German lawyer’s name; preserve original notices. Under §27(2) IRG the OLG prosecution office determines the detention institution, so the airport does not identify the prison.

How long can extradition custody last?

There is no single fixed maximum for all German extradition detention. The governing instrument, the completeness of the request and the need to keep detention necessary and proportionate all matter. Under §15 IRG extradition custody after a formal request depends on specified risks, including evasion of the procedure or serious interference with finding the truth; §17 requires a written OLG warrant identifying the grounds. Detention cannot be justified merely by saying a foreign government wants a person.

Under §16(2) IRG, provisional extradition custody without a formal request and supporting documents is limited domestically to two months from capture or provisional arrest, or three months where a non-European state requested it. An applicable treaty can be stricter. Under Article 16(4) of the European Convention on Extradition, provisional arrest may end without documents after 18 days and must not exceed 40 days. The trigger is document receipt, not the date of a newspaper report or lawyer’s letter. Release does not preclude re-arrest on later receipt under Article 16(5).

Separately, §26 IRG requires the OLG to review continuing extradition custody after each two-month period calculated from apprehension, provisional arrest or the latest custody-review decision; the court can order earlier review. Under §25 it can suspend execution of the detention warrant if less intrusive measures secure the detention purpose. The person should therefore supply verifiable residence, employment, family responsibilities and other materials bearing on actual risk, not merely ask for “bail” as if English bail law governed.

For EAW matters, §83c's normal 60-day decision aim does not itself create an automatic release at midnight on day 60. Equally, the ten-day handover scheduling rule is not unconditional: §83c(4) contemplates external obstacles, German domestic proceedings and serious humanitarian reasons. A separate release rule in §83d applies when a person has not been collected within ten days after expiry of an agreed transfer date and no new date has been agreed. The lawyer must establish the exact date and which exception, if any, is documented.

Does German or other EU nationality change the outcome?

Article 16(2) of the German Grundgesetz (Basic Law) protects German nationals from extradition to foreign countries, but expressly permits statutory exceptions for EU Member States or an international court where rule-of-law requirements are observed. Section 80 IRG makes the EU exception conditional. For prosecution warrants, the German court examines the relevant connection of the conduct to the requesting state and the statutory return-to-Germany offer after a final custodial sentence, together with further conditions where the conduct lacks that foreign connection. For an EAW to enforce a sentence already imposed, §80(3) permits surrender of a German only with the person's consent formally recorded after judicial instruction.

Dual nationality is not an automatic escape route and must be proved with actual nationality documents. A non-German EU citizen does not simply receive the exact constitutional German-national protection; separate EU-law safeguards can become relevant when a non-EU state seeks that person's extradition. For long-term foreign residents, §83b(2) IRG may allow an authorisation refusal in specified EAW circumstances. No one should assume that a residence permit, an asylum claim or marriage to a German citizen automatically prevents surrender. Individual refusal grounds are examined in the companion guide to stopping extradition from Germany.

What does consent change, and what does it not change?

Under §41 IRG a person facing an extradition detention warrant can, after judicial explanation, consent on the judicial record to vereinfachte Auslieferung (simplified extradition). In that situation the formal admissibility proceedings can be omitted, and §41(3) makes the consent irrevocable. That decision should be made only after the person knows which state is requesting custody, for which acts, and what documents and protections are being left untested. In an EAW case it also means losing the ordinary §79(2) judicial scrutiny of the decision not to invoke certain authorisation obstacles.

A separate question is whether to waive the speciality protection in §11 IRG. Speciality generally constrains the requesting state from prosecuting or punishing the surrendered person for earlier unrelated acts without further permission, subject to legal exceptions. Section 41(2) allows a separately informed waiver in a simplified procedure. Agreeing to speed up surrender and relinquishing speciality must not be collapsed into one supposed signature. An extradition lawyer should obtain an accurate record of both answers.

Extradition is not immigration deportation, governed by different powers and authorities. Durchlieferung (transit through Germany) follows separate IRG provisions and is not Germany’s decision on the principal extradition of someone arrested elsewhere. See extradition versus deportation.

What does an extradition lawyer actually do at each stage?

The practical task is to create one reliable file linking the foreign judicial record to the specific German legal questions. On the day of arrest, counsel should secure the arrest record, identify the OLG district, inspect the warrant and address custody. Before an admissibility decision, counsel compares the alleged offence, conduct dates, legal provisions and sentence with the request, confirms which treaty or EU provision applies, and obtains properly attributable evidence rather than unsourced allegations. Counsel can ask the OLG to obtain necessary additional information under §30 IRG.

Bring or securely transmit the following, marking any missing item rather than improvising it:

• Arrest record, OLG extradition detention warrant if issued, police reference and date and time of apprehension.
• Passport, other nationality records, German residence records and information about any dual citizenship.
• Foreign arrest warrant, EAW, indictment, judgment, translation and details of the requesting court or prosecutor.
• Documents on home, work, dependants and medical needs relevant to detention and transfer, where applicable.
• Records of German proceedings concerning the same conduct, any international protection status and any relevant correspondence from the issuing state.
• Contact details of German and foreign lawyers and written instructions about who may share the file with the family.

Hypothetical example: a Georgian citizen is detained at Frankfurt Airport following a Georgian search alert. The EU EAW 60-day period does not apply merely because arrest occurred in Germany. Counsel identifies the OLG, determines whether a formal Convention request has arrived, applies the correct provisional-arrest limit and assesses detention risks. An EAW from an EU state instead invokes different documents and §83c periods.

Can a decision be revisited before surrender?

Section 13(1) IRG makes the OLG admissibility decision final, with no ordinary direct appeal. Under §33, new circumstances or previously unknown facts can justify reconsideration by the same OLG and suspension of surrender. A §42 reference to the Bundesgerichtshof is made by the OLG, not the detainee. Constitutional emergency relief is separate. See the Germany refusal and remedies guide.

This guide provides general legal information, not advice on an individual case. The site's team can help coordinate cross-border defence with independently instructed local counsel; see request an assessment.