Extradition Lawyer in Graz: Landesgericht für Strafsachen Graz and the Local Procedure

This page covers the local court route and practical access. For nationwide procedure and refusal grounds, see the Austria extradition guide and the separate guide to challenging extradition from Austria.

Which Graz institutions handle the case?

Why does the place of arrest or detention matter?

Section 26(1) ARHG generally assigns the case to the prosecutor for the person’s residence or stay. If there is no such place, the starting point is the district where the person was apprehended; if the person is in judicial custody, the place of detention is decisive. Under § 26(2), a single judge of the regional court at that prosecutor’s seat makes the judicial decisions. For a person living in Graz or apprehended at Graz Airport, the published local information points to the Staatsanwaltschaft Graz and Landesgericht für Strafsachen Graz.

The airport is in Feldkirchen / Graz, not the city centre, so give counsel the exact arrest location and time. If the person’s residence, arrest or detention is outside Graz and Graz-Umgebung, verify the assigned prosecutor in the actual file rather than relying only on a general court map.

What should happen in the first 72 hours?

This is a practical action plan, not a separate statutory “72-hour extradition deadline.” Calculate each legal clock from the event specified by the applicable provision.

These 48-hour rules concern custody, not the whole extradition case. Other custody orders need individual review.

What happens at the first extradition hearing?

Under § 31 ARHG, the court questions the person and decides admissibility under § 33. It checks identity, the request and supporting documents, applicable treaty conditions, and legal obstacles under Austrian law. It does not ordinarily retry the foreign criminal case. The review must address relevant asylum issues and any constitutional or human-rights obstacle properly raised by the evidence.

An oral hearing is required if the person or prosecutor requests one, or the court considers it necessary. If the person is detained, the admissibility hearing takes place within a detention hearing. Defence representation is mandatory; a detained person must attend unless counsel expressly waives their presence. The person and counsel may respond and have the right to speak last. Without a hearing, the court may declare extradition inadmissible only after the person, counsel and prosecutor can comment.

If the person does not understand German, ask for an interpreter. StPO § 56 provides for interpreting and, where needed for defence rights, translation of essential documents. A relative is not a substitute. Before making a choice, the person should understand the allegation, right to silence and right to consult counsel.

Where may the person be held, and how can family visit?

Justizanstalt Graz-Jakomini, Klosterwiesgasse 84, 8010 Graz, is a local remand facility to check for a person held in proceedings connected with the Graz criminal-court district. Confirm the actual facility and prisoner reference with counsel; not everyone arrested in the region is held there.

Remand visits require permission from the judge or prosecutor and an approved booking. Visitors need official photo ID and must arrive 15 minutes early at Room 10, ground floor, Landesgericht für Strafsachen Graz. Listed hours are Mon/Tue 08:00–14:00 and Wed/Thu 08:00–12:00; no weekend or public-holiday visits are listed. Check current rules before travelling.

Family visits are not confidential lawyer access. Give counsel the detainee’s name, birth date, citizenship, arrest location, file number and preferred language. Confirm custody location, contact restrictions and arrangements for documents and interpretation. Do not send originals to an unverified address.

Is this an EU surrender case or third-country extradition?

A European Arrest Warrant (EAW) from another EU Member State is a surrender procedure under Austria’s EU-JZG, not ordinary third-country extradition under the ARHG. The local prosecutor and court may still be involved, but tests and deadlines differ. See the European Arrest Warrant procedure guide.

For requests from outside the EU, the ARHG applies subject to the relevant treaty. Austria has been party to the 1957 European Convention on Extradition since 19 August 1969, but the applicable treaty basis and any reservations or declarations must be checked for the requesting state and the conduct alleged. The court’s admissibility ruling is not the federal Minister of Justice’s separate decision under § 34 ARHG on whether extradition is to be granted; see the parent guide for that nationwide stage.

An INTERPOL Red Notice does not itself determine whether extradition is permissible in Austria. The authorities must identify the legal basis and follow the applicable domestic procedure. For the notice’s separate legal effect, see how to check an INTERPOL Red Notice.

Which decision can be challenged, and where does the appeal go?

Under § 31(6) ARHG, a complaint against admissibility goes to the Oberlandesgericht Graz. If the decision is pronounced orally, the person or prosecutor must announce the complaint within three days; it may be elaborated within 14 days after service of the written decision. The complaint has suspensive effect. Counsel should calculate the deadline from the record and service documents.

An admissibility complaint is distinct from a detention challenge, immigration removal decision or international application. Section 89(6) StPO may exclude a further ordinary remedy against the higher regional court. Any extraordinary or human-rights route needs separate deadline and admissibility review. Refusal grounds belong in the Austria refusal and remedies guide.

In OLG Graz, 10 Bs 105/25d, 28 April 2025, the court dismissed a complaint against continued extradition detention in a Graz prosecution case. The request concerned enforcement of a Turkish sentence imposed in absentia, and the court considered an assurance about reopening the foreign proceedings. It held that once the first-instance court had declared extradition admissible, the detention order was no longer limited by an ordinary detention period under § 29(5) ARHG; routine detention hearings of the court’s own motion no longer take place at that stage. The court also stated that no further legal recourse lay against that particular detention decision. This does not mean that detention is free of legal conditions: § 29(6) ARHG separately requires release if one year in extradition detention passes without a decision by the Minister of Justice, and detention beyond six months is subject to the statutory conditions in that subsection. The decision is fact-specific, not a guarantee or a general bar to every possible legal challenge. Counsel should calculate the applicable dates from the custody and service records.

A later Supreme Court decision in the same Graz extradition matter illustrates the boundary between remedies. In OGH 11 Os 118/25z (11 November 2025), the Austrian Supreme Court held that a Grundrechtsbeschwerde (fundamental-rights complaint) was not admissible against an OLG Graz ruling that dealt only with extradition admissibility, not detention. The Court treated the filing in substance as a request for renewal of proceedings under § 363a StPO in its extended application, but rejected it because the applicant had not stated the alleged Convention violations with sufficient precision or engaged with the OLG’s reasoning. This is not a blanket ruling that every further remedy is unavailable; it shows why counsel must identify the exact decision challenged and meet the separate admissibility requirements of the remedy used.

What should the family or foreign lawyer prepare?

• Arrest record, provisional-arrest notice, Red Notice details if known, court/prosecutor documents and service dates.
• Full name, birth details, citizenship, current/recent addresses, and exact arrest place and time.
• Foreign warrant or judgment, appeal/retrial information, and documents about any trial in absence.
• Time-sensitive medical, interpreter, family/residence and specific risk evidence.
• Austrian/foreign counsel details and any required written authority.
• For a Graz-Jakomini visit: facility confirmation, permission, approved booking and photo ID.

Hypothetical example. Hypothetically, a Georgian national is arrested at Graz Airport on a Red Notice linked to a non-EU request. Counsel should identify the assigned prosecutor, confirm custody, check whether the formal request has arrived, review the treaty and arrange an interpreter. Calculate each deadline from the order; the family should follow Graz-Jakomini’s visit rules.

Lex Agency’s team coordinates cross-border defence with local counsel. For a confidential assessment of the documents and the next deadline, use the contact request.