THEMIS FINAL PRACTICAL CASE FRANCE has issued a European Arrest Warrant against JAN LUBJOJEVIC, a Croatian citizen of unknown residence, who was sentenced in France to a term of 9 years imprisonment following his conviction on two counts of aggravated robbery. The facts sustaining the warrant, issued by the competent French Court in January 2009, were that he was one of three individuals who had participated in two bank robberies between December 2007 and January 2008, in the French city of Toulouse. Although firearms had been shown on both occasions by all three attackers, no shots were fired. Further, no-one had been hurt. The amounts involved in the robberies were € 457.780 and € 665.230, respectively. No money had been recuperated so far. JAN LUBJOJEVIC was arrested on November 6th 2010 at the main national airport of EU COUNTRY A, not only pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant, issued by France in December 2009 (upon a Croatian information based on his evasion), but also on an Internal Arrest Warrant issued by CROATIA in that same month, and disseminated internationally through the INTERPOL system. When it became aware that LUBJOJEVIC had been arrested, CROATIA issued a formal extradition request addressed to EU COUNTRY A based on the fact that he had been definitively sentenced in September 2008 by the competent Croatian criminal court to a penalty of 12 years of imprisonment on counts of attempted aggravated robbery and two crimes of attempted murder of Croatian police officers. The facts sustaining this condemnation are as follows: In April, 2007, he entered with three other persons in a bank branch in the city of Osijek and while showing firearms to all those present robbed the Bank of all the money existing in the bank coffers. Having received an amount of around € 150.500 in Croatian money and while trying to get out they were intercepted by the Police. In the exchange of shots which followed (in which LUBJOJEVIC fired several) one of the robbers was killed and two policemen seriously injured in the chest and head, respectively. JAN LUBJOJEVIC and his companion managed to escape with a bag containing around € 80.000. JAN LUBJOJEVIC was arrested in March 2008 in Croatia and had been, since then, serving both custodial detention and the above sentence until December 2009, when he escaped from prison. In the meantime, in January 2009, and upon a request issued by French authorities, he was temporarily transferred to France to attend the French trial. Accordingly, the Croatian authorities have claimed in the extradition request that his surrender was also being requested for prosecution for a crime of evasion, committed in December 2009 which corresponds to an abstract penalty of three years of imprisonment. JAN LUBJOJEVIC has been convicted on several occasions in Croatia for crimes of theft and other minor offences. He has served two imprisonment sentences, the first in 1997 for one and a half years and the other in 2003 for 3 years, both for theft. He is 37, single, no close family links known, and although claiming to be a carpenter there is no evidence that he had been exercising this profession or any other in his birth city of Split for several years. His last known residence was also in Split but there is no record of his presence in his address since April 2007. Faced with these two surrender requests on JAN LUBJOJEVIC, and considering his refusal to surrender voluntarily to FRANCE or CROATIA, the judicial authorities of EU COUNTRY A have decided to apply for EUROJUST advice on which of them they should give precedence. You and your team are undertaking training at EUROJUST and have been requested to draft a preparatory advice, not exceeding 10 pages on this issue. The aim of this draft is to give proper answer to these two questions: a) Is EUROJUST competent to give an advice to the solution of this case? b) Irrespective of your answer to the above question, and assuming that EUROJUST is to that effect competent, what would your advice be on what the surrender of JAN LUBJOJEVIC to either France or Croatia is concerned? JURY NOTES TO THE TEAMS: 1-For the purposes of this exercise please consider that: a) National Law of EU COUNTRY A does not contain any legal statement different from the ones existing in international legal instruments applying to these cases. b) EU COUNTRY A has implemented the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European Arrest Warrant. c) Both EU COUNTRY A and FRANCE are not linked to CROATIA by any bilateral extradition agreement. 2- If you consider that any other facts beyond the ones indicated above are indispensable to allow you for a good decision of the case, you are allowed to invent them at your own discretion. However, those facts and an explanation of the reasons why you deem them indispensable to your draft should be provided in an extra addendum of one page maximum.