The Warsaw District Court has decided that Volodymyr Z., a Ukrainian national suspected by German authorities of involvement in the 2022 Nord Stream pipeline explosions, will not be extradited to Germany. The court also ordered his release from temporary detention, delivering a strongly worded critique of both the German extradition request and the legal basis behind it.

According to the court, the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued by Germany was “formally correct” but “substantively insufficient,” as it consisted of merely one page and contained no underlying evidence that could justify the charges. The court emphasized that such a minimal submission “cannot serve as the basis for restricting an individual’s liberty or for transferring that person to a foreign state.”

Criticism of German Jurisdiction and Legal Grounds

In its written justification, the Warsaw District Court rejected the German argument that its criminal code could be applied to acts committed in international waters. The judges noted that German criminal law generally applies only to offenses committed on German territory or aboard vessels and aircraft flying the German flag. Any extraterritorial application, the court ruled, is “exceptional in nature and does not extend to incidents occurring in the Baltic Sea far from the German coastline.” As such, the court deemed Germany’s attempt to assert jurisdiction over acts on international waters to be legally unfounded.

The court further observed that, from a legal perspective, the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines are not German infrastructure projects but the property of Russia’s Gazprom—Nord Stream 2 being wholly Russian-owned. “Germany is seeking to prosecute Volodymyr Z. for damaging Russian property,” the court stated, posing the rhetorical question of whether Ukraine, in defending itself against Russian aggression, should first analyze the ownership structure of every potential military target to ensure it does not affect any German investors.

“Are Ukrainian soldiers supposed to check whether German shareholders own a minority stake in a Russian pipeline before taking military action? Otherwise, they’ll be prosecuted by Germany?” the court asked, warning that such logic would lead to “absurd consequences in the practice of international law.”

Reference to Just War and Functional Immunity

The ruling draws extensively on international legal doctrine, invoking the concept of the just war—a principle dating back to antiquity and deeply rooted in European legal thought. The court found that Ukraine’s armed defense against Russia’s invasion “fully corresponds to the definition of a just war, waged in defense of sovereignty, peace, and civilian life.” In this context, the court held that any sabotage or diversionary operations targeting the aggressor’s infrastructure may constitute acts of state defense rather than terrorism or criminal sabotage.

Consequently, such actions fall under functional immunity—a rule of international law stating that individuals acting on behalf of a state cannot be held personally liable for official acts performed in their capacity as agents of that state. Any potential responsibility, the court reasoned, would rest with the state itself, not the individual soldier or operative.

Sharp Words Toward the German Judiciary

The court’s justification also included pointed criticism of the German justice system, echoing arguments presented by the defense about its alleged politicization and lack of true judicial independence. The defense cited, among other examples, the case of a German judge reportedly imprisoned for a ruling that lifted mask mandates in schools—an episode the court referenced as an indicator that “in Germany, a judge may be punished for a judgment rendered.”

While the Polish court emphasized that it did not rule on political matters, its decision reflects evident skepticism toward the fairness and impartiality of German judicial authorities, as well as concern about the prospect of a fair trial for Volodymyr Z. if extradited.

Background of the Case

On September 30, Polish police arrested Volodymyr Z. in Pruszków on the basis of a European Arrest Warrant issued by a German court. He was accused of participating in the 2022 Nord Stream explosions, which damaged the twin pipelines connecting Russia and Germany under the Baltic Sea. On October 6, the Warsaw District Court extended his temporary detention for 40 days, but his defense filed an appeal, arguing that the case raised “precedent-setting questions” of international law.

Volodymyr Z. has consistently denied any involvement, claiming he was in Ukraine at the time of the blasts. If convicted in Germany, he could have faced up to 15 years in prison.

With the court’s decision now final, he will not be extradited. The ruling stands as a rare and striking example of a national court openly challenging both the legal and moral foundations of another EU member state’s prosecution, grounding its reasoning in international law, state immunity, and the right of nations to defend themselves against aggression.