Extradition Lawyer in Brasov: Curtea de Apel Brașov and the Local Procedure

Which court and prosecutor handle a Brașov case?

Venue normally follows where the person is found. Article 42(1) assigns classic extradition to that district’s court of appeal and attached prosecutor. The official court page confirms the Criminal Section and its coverage of Brașov and Covasna Counties.

When might the case go to Bucharest instead?

Brașov is the ordinary venue for a person found in its district. Under Article 42(2), however, Curtea de Apel București has jurisdiction when a state simultaneously requests two or more people in the same or connected cases found in different appeal-court districts. If the person’s location is unknown, the request goes to the prosecutor attached to the Bucharest Court of Appeal. Confirm the recorded location and whether related people are included.

Local airport point: a stop at Brașov-Ghimbav does not by itself tell you which procedure applies. Ask whether the legal basis is a European Arrest Warrant (EAW), a Schengen alert connected to an EAW, a provisional extradition-arrest request, or another alert.

The first 72 hours: a practical action plan

This is a practical checklist, not a separate statutory 72-hour deadline.

If an urgent provisional-arrest request arrives before the formal extradition request, Article 44 sets a 40-day maximum unless the treaty provides longer. Once the court handles the extradition request, Article 43 sets a 180-day total maximum until surrender, with review no later than every 30 days. In justified cases, the court may replace detention with house arrest, judicial control or bail only if it considers that the person will not evade proceedings; this is not automatic. Separately, an order taking, maintaining, replacing or ending provisional extradition arrest may be challenged within 48 hours from pronouncement. The higher court must receive the file within 48 hours and decide the challenge within five days of registration. A challenge to an order imposing or maintaining arrest does not suspend its execution.

Is it extradition, an EAW or an INTERPOL notice?

For a non-EU request, the 1957 European Convention on Extradition may apply if both states are bound by it, alongside any bilateral treaty. For EU Member States, Romania generally applies the EAW regime from 1 January 2007, subject to the transitional exceptions in its Council of Europe declaration. Romania withdrew its earlier Article 2 penalty-threshold reservation in 2006. Check the requesting state’s treaty position and any relevant transitional exception.

For EAW cases, the CJEU’s judgments in Aranyosi and Căldăraru (Joined Cases C‑404/15 and C‑659/15 PPU, 5 April 2016) and Dorobantu (C‑128/18, 15 October 2019) require objective, reliable, specific and up-to-date evidence followed by an individual assessment of whether this person faces a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment; general reports alone do not automatically justify refusal. In Rugu and Aucroix (Joined Cases C‑722/23 and C‑91/24, 4 June 2026), the Grand Chamber addressed what follows when an EAW issued to enforce a custodial sentence is refused because of such a risk. The executing authority must assess whether the sentence can instead be enforced in its own territory under Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA; Article 4(6) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA is relevant only where its conditions are met, including the requested person’s nationality or residence and an undertaking to enforce the sentence under domestic law. This is a case-specific, post-refusal issue, not an automatic ground for refusing classic extradition. See the Romania refusal and appeals guide for detailed grounds and evidence.

What can the court decide, and how is its judgment challenged?

Under Article 52(2), the court does not decide guilt or retry the foreign case. The defence should identify a legal issue, such as identity, a statutory condition, a treaty requirement or an evidenced rights risk. Under Article 47, consent to classic extradition is given before the court, formally recorded and checked for legal obstacles; it is not simply a waiver of the hearing. Waiving the rule of speciality is separate. EAW consent has different consequences and is generally irrevocable under Article 104.

For a classic extradition judgment, the person and the competent Prosecutor General attached to the competent Court of Appeal may file a challenge within five days from pronouncement with the Criminal Section of the ICCJ. The ICCJ must hear it within no more than 10 days, in a panel of three judges. A challenge against refusal suspends execution; a challenge against a grant suspends surrender but does not itself end provisional detention. The five-day period runs from pronouncement, not from a relative’s later receipt of a copy. This is separate from the 48-hour challenge against an interim arrest order described above. Do not automatically apply either classic-extradition route to an EAW decision. After a final judicial decision, the Ministry of Justice coordinates communication and practical surrender; it does not retry admissibility.

What should the family or foreign lawyer prepare?

• Full name, date and place of birth, citizenship, passport details and all spelling or transliteration variants.
• The arrest notice, EAW, SIS alert details, INTERPOL notice information, provisional-arrest request or formal extradition request identified by the authorities.
• The Romanian case number, detention time, copies of orders and the confirmed custody institution.
• The foreign warrant or judgment, sentence details and information about whether the person attended the foreign trial or received notice of it.
• Medical records, medication needs, interpreter concerns, proof of residence and important family or care responsibilities.
• Contact details for a lawyer in the requesting state who can obtain the current warrant, judgment, procedural history and reliable supporting evidence.

Use the official Curtea de Apel Brașov portal to find case and hearing information once you have the file number. Listings can be delayed or incomplete; confirm visits and document delivery with the custody institution and counsel.

A local example: a stop at Brașov-Ghimbav Airport

Hypothetical example. A Georgian citizen arriving from another Schengen airport is stopped for an identity check at Brașov-Ghimbav. The airport notice specifically describes routine-check removal for Romanian citizens on Schengen routes; it also says border police remain present and may conduct random or unannounced checks. The notice does not itself identify the instrument behind this Georgian citizen’s stop. The person should ask which alert or warrant was found and which authority formally detained them. If the person is located in the Brașov district, the local court and attached prosecutor are ordinarily involved; if related people are located in different appeal-court districts, the Bucharest exception must be checked.

Where to read about the wider Romanian procedure

This page covers the Brașov/Covasna local route. The Romania country guide explains the national process; the European Arrest Warrant guide explains EU surrender. Use the separate refusal-and-appeals guide for the full analysis of refusal grounds. Identify the correct procedure before choosing a remedy or calculating a deadline.

For a time-sensitive case, the site’s team can coordinate cross-border defence with local counsel. To share documents and request an initial review, use the secure contact request.