Extradition Lawyer in Patras: Council of the Patras Court of Appeal and the Local Procedure

First establish whether the document is an extradition request from a non-EU state or a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued by an EU Member State. They are different procedures. Ordinary extradition is governed by Articles 436–457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Law 4620/2019), subject to treaty rules. An EAW follows Law 3251/2004 and a separate EU surrender framework. See the separate guides on extradition from Greece and the European Arrest Warrant procedure.

Which Patras authorities handle the case?

The Council of the Patras Court of Appeal is the local judicial council for an ordinary extradition file actually assigned to its district. The appellate prosecutor handles the prosecution-side steps, including the identity and custody process described in Articles 445–446. Law 5108/2024 identifies the Patras appellate district and its four first-instance court areas. Article 443's referral rule refers to the district where the person resides; an arrest in Patras is important but should not be treated as conclusive proof of venue in every case. Check the court named in the referral and confirm the current assignment before filing.

What happens after an arrest in Patras?

This is a practical first-72-hours plan, not a statutory deadline. Legal time limits run from specified documents or events, not automatically from arrest.

1. Immediately: identify the legal route and location. Record the requesting state, warrant/request number, arrest time and place, detention facility, arresting authority and whether the case is an EAW or third-country extradition. Keep the arrest papers and any translated notice. If the arrest occurred during embarkation or a border check at the Port of Patras, preserve the ferry ticket or boarding pass, terminal or vessel details, and any border-control paperwork. These records help establish the sequence of events but do not, by themselves, determine which court is competent.
2. Request the file and language assistance. Article 447 permits the person or counsel to inspect the papers and request copies at the person's expense. Under Article 449, the person may attend with chosen counsel and an interpreter, or ask the President of the Court of Appeal to appoint them. State the language understood and request interpretation of the warrant and hearing information. Counsel should confirm the current official wording and request access promptly, recording any refusal or delay.
3. Prepare for the council hearing. Article 449(1) requires the President to convene the council within three days after receiving the Article 446 reports—not necessarily within three days of arrest. The person or prosecutor may seek an adjournment; the council may postpone for eight days or, if required papers are missing, for a reasonable period. It may replace detention with restrictive conditions, which end automatically when an extradition-approving decision is published. Confirm the actual date the Article 446 reports reached the President and check any appointment order with the registry; do not calculate this step automatically from arrest.
4. Preserve evidence before the first hearing. Give counsel identity and nationality records, the charge or conviction documents, prior proceedings, limitation-period information, medical records and evidence of any concrete risk of torture, inhuman treatment, political persecution or discrimination. If asylum or international protection is pending, provide the filing receipt and related decisions. General country statements do not replace individualised evidence.
5. Calendar the appeal trigger immediately. Article 451 allows the person and prosecutor to appeal to Areios Pagos within five days from publication of the final decision in court. Do not wait for a written copy or family notification. The Supreme Court decides within 15 days; the person must be summoned at least three days before the hearing. Recent Areios Pagos decisions have also applied the five-day period in Article 451 of the Greek Code of Criminal Procedure to European Arrest Warrant appeals, despite the 24-hour wording in Article 22(1) of Law 3251/2004. Decision 438/2026 treats the five-day period as the later, more favourable rule. Because the issue has been litigated, counsel should verify the latest applicable ruling and calculate the deadline from publication of the decision in court; do not wait for a written copy or family notification.

How long can provisional or extradition detention last?

Article 445 distinguishes urgent provisional arrest from the later formal request. If the request for extradition has not been submitted within 30 days after the arrest, the arrested person must be released by order of the appellate prosecutor. The statutory trigger is failure to submit the request in time—not merely a delay in the authorities' receipt or internal processing after submission. This is separate from the appeal period and the overall detention limit. Before relying on the 30-day rule in a live case, counsel should verify the current official text and calculate the deadline from the actual arrest date and the formal filing record.

The accessible consolidated text of Article 452(2) states that the person must in any event be released if 24 months pass from the date of arrest, although the judicial council may extend that period by a further six months. Release is also required if the requesting state does not take the person within two months after notification to that state of the Minister's surrender decision. If detention appears unlawful or its continuation is disputed, ask counsel to put the objection before the competent council promptly: Article 452(3) assigns detention disputes to that council and requires the person to be summoned three days before the hearing. Before relying on an outer limit, counsel should verify the current official text, any extension order, the arrest date and the date the requesting state was notified.

These are statutory outer limits, not a prediction of duration. Further treaty documents, court requests or an appeal may prolong proceedings. A favourable court opinion does not itself authorise transfer: the ministerial stage is separate.

What documents and evidence should the family or foreign lawyer send?

• A clear scan of the passport, identity document and any alternative spellings or transliterations of the person's name.
• The arrest record, warrant, INTERPOL notice or diffusion if one has been shown, and every page of the extradition request or EAW.
• The requesting state's charge, judgment, statutory provisions and any certified translations already supplied.
• A short chronology with dates: arrest, notification, prior proceedings, any earlier refusal of extradition, asylum filing, and any appeal deadline communicated by the court.
• Evidence relevant to an individual risk assessment: medical or psychiatric reports, records of previous ill-treatment, specific threats, evidence of political targeting, and material showing why assurances offered by the requesting state may not address the risk.
• Contact details for family, consular officials if appropriate, and the person who can obtain records from the requesting country quickly.

Do not fill evidentiary gaps by guessing. Tell counsel what is missing, where it can be obtained and how quickly it can be translated. Article 444 permits requests for explanations where doubts remain; Article 450 governs further evidence in the circumstances allowed by the applicable treaty.

What does the Patras extradition case B.A.C. v. Greece show?

A verified local example is B.A.C., a Turkish national arrested in Patras on 12 March 2013. On 26 March 2013, the Patras Court of Appeal rejected Turkey's request, citing the risk of ill-treatment linked to the applicant's political views and the vague, abstract description of the alleged offences. The prosecutor appealed; on 26 April 2013 the Court of Cassation upheld the refusal. The ECtHR's judgment in B.A.C. v. Greece (no. 11981/15, 13 October 2016) found violations of Articles 8 and 13 taken with Article 8 because the asylum appeal had remained undecided for more than twelve years. It also found a violation of Articles 3 and 13 if the applicant were returned to Turkey without an up-to-date, individual assessment of the risk. The judgment does not establish that every briefly described charge defeats extradition.

A later Areios Pagos decision, 1552/2025, arose from a different appellate district and is not a Patras ruling. It explains that, where the European Convention on Extradition governs, its non-inquiry rule may displace domestic Code provisions requiring evidence of guilt at the extradition stage. This does not remove the need for a sufficiently particularised description of the alleged conduct or prevent a properly evidenced objection based on political targeting or a real risk of prohibited treatment. The council does not retry the foreign prosecution. Article 13 of the Convention and Article 444 of the Code allow requests for supplementary information where the papers leave a relevant doubt. A separate 2025 Areios Pagos decision, 1311/2025, confirms that the Supreme Court may rule on detention or restrictive conditions while an extradition appeal is pending; this is not an automatic right to release. For a fuller treatment of refusal grounds and remedies, see the separate guide on how to stop extradition from Greece.

Which treaty applies, and is this really extradition?

The European Convention on Extradition of 13 December 1957 has been in force for Greece since 27 August 1961. Its provisions must be checked together with Greece's declarations and reservations and the treaty, if any, between Greece and the requesting state. Article 436 of the Code makes the domestic rules apply where no treaty exists and as supplementary rules where they do not conflict with an applicable convention.

The Council of Europe Treaty Office is the primary place to verify Greece’s declaration concerning Article 6 (nationality) and whether reservations concerning Articles 7 (fiscal offences), 11 (death penalty), 18 and 19 apply. Their effect must be checked against the particular requesting state and the facts of the request; do not rely on a generic list alone. Before relying on any reservation or declaration, confirm the current official depositary entry and how it applies to the requesting state and the facts. An EU-issued EAW follows Law 3251/2004. A Red Notice is not a court judgment or final extradition order. Deportation is a separate route with different decision-makers and remedies; see extradition versus deportation.

A hypothetical example: what if the request is incomplete?

Hypothetical: a person is arrested in Patras on a request from a state party to the European Convention on Extradition. If the papers omit a required document or do not identify the conduct clearly, counsel should pinpoint the treaty requirement, request clarification under Article 13 of the Convention and Article 444 of the Code, and preserve evidence of any human-rights risk. A bare argument that the foreign state has not proved guilt may be barred by the treaty's non-inquiry rule. For an EAW, use Law 3251/2004 instead.

Questions to settle before the first hearing

The site's team coordinates cross-border defence with local counsel; to share the documents and request an initial assessment, use the consultation request.