TPF, 21.05.2026, RR.2026.49
Facts
On 21 November 2025, Portugal submitted to the Federal Office of Justice (FOJ) an extradition request against A. He had been sentenced in Portugal to a term of one year and six months' imprisonment for driving a vehicle without a licence and while intoxicated on 5 April 2011. On 26 March 2026, the FOJ granted the extradition. (act. 1.1, FOJ files 1b, 1c)
On 2 May 2026, A. filed an appeal against this decision with the Complaints Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court, seeking its annulment. In its reply of 11 May 2026, the FOJ sought a ruling that the appeal was inadmissible as being out of time and, in the alternative, its dismissal. However, by letter of 18 May 2026, before the Court ruled on the merits, the appellant declared that he was withdrawing his appeal. (act. 1, 5, 6)
Law
The Court recalls the legal framework governing extradition between Switzerland and Portugal. Relations are primarily governed by the European Convention on Extradition (CEExtr) and its protocols. To these are added the relevant provisions of the Schengen acquis, in particular the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement (CAAS), the regulations on the Schengen Information System (SIS) and the Convention relating to extradition between the Member States of the EU (CE-UE). (consid. 1)
In the alternative, for matters not governed by the treaties, the Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (EIMP) and its ordinance (OEIMP) apply. Domestic law may also apply if it is more favourable to extradition than international law (principle of favourability). Respect for fundamental rights remains reserved at all times. An extradition decision of the FOJ (art. 55 para. 1 EIMP) is subject to appeal before the Complaints Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court. (consid. 2, 3)
In procedural terms, the withdrawal of an appeal has the consequence that the case is struck from the register, since it becomes devoid of purpose. As regards costs, art. 63 para. 1 of the Administrative Procedure Act (PA) provides that they are borne by the unsuccessful party. Case law holds that a party who withdraws its appeal is treated as the unsuccessful party and must, consequently, bear the costs of the proceedings. (consid. 4, 5, 6)
Application to the present case
Since the appellant, A., formally withdrew his appeal by letter of 18 May 2026, the proceedings before the Complaints Chamber became devoid of purpose. There is therefore no longer any need for the Court to examine the arguments raised, in particular the question of the lateness of the appeal raised by the FOJ. The case must be struck from the register. (consid. 4)
By withdrawing his appeal, the appellant is treated as the unsuccessful party within the meaning of the law. He must consequently bear the costs of the appeal proceedings. In the present case, these costs are limited to a court fee, the amount of which is set by the Federal Criminal Court Regulation on costs (RFPPF). The Court sets this fee at CHF 300. (consid. 5, 6, 7)
Outcome
The Complaints Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court takes note of the withdrawal of the appeal by A. Consequently, the proceedings are struck from the register. The costs of the proceedings, set at a fee of CHF 300, are borne by the appellant. (Operative part, points 1, 2, 3)
