(1)of Framework Decision 2002/584, namely the requirement that it be guaranteed that they act independently in issuing such an arrest warrant. 89 In the present case, it is, in that regard, irrelevant, for the reasons stated in paragraph 73 of the present judgment, that, in connection with the issuing of the European arrest warrants at issue in the main proceedings, no instruction in a specific case was issued to the public prosecutor’s office in Lübeck or in Zwickau from the ministers for justice of the Länder concerned. 90 In the light of all the foregoing, the answer to the questions referred is that the concept of an ‘issuing judicial authority’,

(1)of Framework Decision 2002/584, must be interpreted as not including public prosecutors’ offices of a Member State which are exposed to the risk of being subject, directly or indirectly, to directions or instructions in a specific case from the executive, such as a Minister for Justice, in connection with the adoption of a decision to issue a European arrest warrant.” Het HvJ EU heeft voor recht verklaard: “2. The concept of an ‘issuing judicial authority’,

(1)of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as not including public prosecutors’ offices of a Member State which are exposed to the risk of being subject, directly or indirectly, to directions or instructions in a specific case from the executive, such as a Minister for Justice, in connection with the adoption of a decision to issue a European arrest warrant.” Gelet hierop ziet de rechtbank aanleiding om het onderzoek ter zitting te heropenen om de verdediging en de officier van justitie in de gelegenheid te stellen om zich over het hiervoor genoemde arrest uit te laten in de onderhavige zaak. 5Beslissing HEROPENT en SCHORST het onderzoek voor onbepaalde tijd; BEVEELT de oproeping van de opgeëiste persoon tegen een nader te bepalen dag en tijdstip met tijdige kennisgeving daarvan aan zijn raadsvrouw. Aldus gedaan door mr. I. Verstraeten-Jochemsen, voorzitter, mrs. J.A.A.G. de Vries en A.W.C.M. van Emmerik, rechters, in tegenwoordigheid van mr. N. Wijkman, griffier, en uitgesproken ter openbare zitting van 6 juni 2019. Ingevolge artikel 29, tweede lid, OLW staat tegen deze uitspraak geen gewoon rechtsmiddel open.