The absence, in the requesting State, of effective protection of the guarantee of judicial impartiality, viewed from an objective standpoint, constitutes a bar to surrender, since that guarantee forms part of the essential core of the right to a fair trial and of the rights of the defence, in accordance with the fundamental principles of the legal order, as guaranteed by the Constitution and by supranational instruments. In the case at issue, the person injured by the offences charged against the requested person had sat on the judicial panel as reporting judge, had also dealt with the preliminary issue of his own incompatibility, had issued the arrest warrant, and had drafted the extradition request.

In matters concerning the extension of extradition, the conditions for granting the request are not met where, although only a summary assessment of the evidence submitted by the requesting State is required, the accompanying documentation does not provide a sufficient prima facie evidentiary basis as to the unlawful origin of the assets involved in the alleged self-laundering offence. The mere purchase of assets abroad, the failure to comply with tax disclosure obligations, and the temporal connection with offences already adjudicated are not, in themselves, sufficient to establish that the reinvested funds originated from the predicate offences.