It is certainly not for the Italian judicial authority to verify the existence of the custodial requirements set out in Article 274 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure for the adoption of a “domestic” precautionary measure by the foreign judicial authority. The only relevant consideration is that the European Arrest Warrant constitutes a judicial decision issued for the purpose of conducting criminal proceedings. It is therefore clear that the challenged decision confuses two distinct levels: on the one hand, the precautionary measure issued by the requesting State; on the other, the measure to be adopted by the requested State in order to ensure the execution of the warrant through the surrender of the requested person.

Under the EAW framework, the executing judge is not required to carry out an autonomous assessment of the evidentiary basis. In particular, the reference to “serious indications of guilt” has been removed from Article 17(4) of the relevant law; therefore, their absence does not constitute a legitimate ground for refusing surrender, not even on a discretionary basis. Moreover, precisely the elimination of any autonomous assessment of serious indications of guilt has led to a significant reduction in the documentation accompanying the European Arrest Warrant, with the consequence that a ground of appeal cannot be based on the alleged insufficiency of the supporting documentation.

Where multiple applications for house arrest are filed within a short timeframe, the Court of Appeal may legitimately reject the subsequent requests by referring to the reasoning already set out in previous decisions, provided that no new and relevant elements have been introduced. In such circumstances, defence arguments relating to the requested person’s personal or professional situation, or to their ties with the national territory, may be deemed insufficient to alter the prior assessment of custodial needs—especially where the Court has already highlighted a concrete risk of absconding or the existence of transnational support networks making alternative measures inadequate.

In the context of extradition for foreign countries, the status of a mother of a child who, even if over three years of age, requires continuous material and emotional care entails that surrender must be made conditional upon the existence, in the requesting State, of adequate guarantees ensuring that the requested person can maintain contact with her children. Such arrangements need not mirror those provided for under the Italian penitentiary system, but must nonetheless be sufficient to safeguard the psychophysical integrity of the child, the parent, and the family unit as a whole.