16. Highlights the link between detention conditions and EAW measures and reminds Member States that Article 3 of the ECHR and the case-law of the European Court of Human Right (ECtHR) impose on the Member States not only negative obligations, by banning them from subjecting prisoners to inhuman and degrading treatment, but also positive obligations, by requiring them to ensure that prison conditions are consistent with human dignity, and that thorough, effective investigations are carried out if such rights are violated; calls on Member States to take particular account of the rights of vulnerable persons and in general thoroughly exam ...[+++]ine alternatives to detention;

16. Highlights the link between detention conditions and EAW measures and reminds Member States that Article 3 of the ECHR and the case-law of the European Court of Human Right (ECtHR) impose on the Member States not only negative obligations, by banning them from subjecting prisoners to inhuman and degrading treatment, but also positive obligations, by requiring them to ensure that prison conditions are consistent with human dignity, and that thorough, effective investigations are carried out if such rights are violated; calls on Member States to take particular account of the rights of vulnerable persons and in general thoroughly exam ...[+++]ine alternatives to detention:

3. Three measures have already been adopted: a Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings[2] in October 2010 and Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to information in criminal proceedings in May 2012[3], and Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consu ...[+++]lar authorities while deprived of liberty in October 2013.[4] Measures on the protection of vulnerable persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings are presented as a package with the present initiative, together with a Directive on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings, which form part of the underlying principles of the right of fair trial.

Article 21 of the European Supervision Order provides for the possibility to issue a European arrest warrant to bring back the person once he is required to stand trial or if he is required to return because he does not fulfil the conditions as imposed by the European Supervision Order.

As for the practical use to which the European Arrest Warrant is put, I would like to state, very briefly in view of the time available, that long-term support for its implementation is available in the shape of information, readily accessible on the Internet, and provided not only by the Council Secretariat, but also by the European Judicial Network, and that the judicial atlas is also rendering outstanding service in this, so that the direct contact between the judicial authorities, which is so urgently necessary to the best possible application of the European Arrest Warrant has thereby been made ...[+++] considerably easier.

A further issue related to EAW cases is that EU citizens who are not residents in the Member State where they are suspected of having committed a criminal offence are quite often kept in pre-trial detention, mainly because of the lack of community ties and the risk of flight.