TPF, 31.10.2025, RR.2025.86 + RR.2025.111
Facts
A., a dual French and Cameroonian national, was sentenced in France to 18 months in prison for illegally operating a business and employing staff without declaring or paying them. Following an alert in the Schengen Information System (SIS), he was arrested in Switzerland on March 25, 2025. He opposes his extradition.
On April 1, 2025, France formally requested his extradition. On June 17, 2025, the Federal Office of Justice (FOJ) granted the extradition but referred the case to the Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court (FCC) to rule on the political offense objection raised by A.
A. appealed the FOJ's decision to the FCC, primarily citing the political offense exception, the expiration of the arrest warrant, the violation of his fundamental rights due to prison conditions in France, and a violation of his right to be heard. He requested his immediate release.
Law
Extradition between Switzerland and France is governed by the European Convention on Extradition (ECE) and, secondarily, by the Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (IMAC). According toArt. 3 para. 1 ECE, extradition is excluded when the offense for which it is requested is considered by the requested Party to be a political offense or an act related to such an offense. It is also excluded when, although based on an ordinary criminal offense, the request appears to be motivated by political considerations or entails a risk of worsening the individual's situation for such reasons.
TheArt. 3 ECHR prohibits torture as well as inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Extradition must be refused when there are substantial and proven grounds to believe that the person sought would face a real risk of such treatment in the requesting State. Regarding a democratic state, respect for fundamental rights is in principle presumed; it is therefore up to the person concerned to demonstrate the existence of a concrete and personal danger.
TheArt. 29 para. 2 of the Constitutionguarantees every party the right to be heard. According to case law, this right includes, in particular, the opportunity to state their position before a decision is rendered against them, to consult the file, and to obtain a sufficiently reasoned decision.
Application to the specific case
The Appeals Chamber joined the two cases (appeal against extradition and political offense objection).
- Right to be heard : The Court rejected the complaint. It found that the FOJ had sufficiently reasoned its decision by addressing the decisive arguments. Any potential violation would, in any case, have been remedied by the appeal procedure before the FCC, which reviews the case with full cognizance.
- Political offense objection : The appellant alleges that the French proceedings are a political conspiracy orchestrated by two political figures against whom he has filed a complaint. The Court dismisses this argument, finding that the allegations are not supported by any concrete evidence. The alleged offenses are common law crimes with no political character. The mere fact of having filed a complaint against political figures is not sufficient to establish a political context.
- Validity of the arrest warrant : The appellant maintains that the appeal he filed in France against his conviction renders the arrest warrant void. The Court rejects this claim. Under French criminal procedure law (Art. 465 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure), an arrest warrant remains enforceable notwithstanding the filing of an appeal, unless a contrary decision is issued, which was not the case here.
- Conditions of detention (Art. 3 ECHR) : The appellant cites prison overcrowding and issues with access to healthcare in French prisons. The Court acknowledges that France has been condemned by the ECHR on these grounds, but notes that measures have been taken (Penitentiary Code, effective remedy). As France is a democratic state, the appellant must prove a concrete and serious risk to his person. He fails to do so. His past experiences show that he received the necessary care, and there is no indication that this will not be the case in the future.
- Request for release : As this request is ancillary to the outcome of the appeal, and extradition is confirmed, it is rejected.
Outcome
The Federal Criminal Court rejects the political offense objection, dismisses the appeal against the FOJ's extradition decision, and rejects the ancillary request for release. The procedural costs are to be borne by the appellant.
Silex newsletter published in collaboration with Elisabetta Tizzoni
