The procurator seems to have intended the latter. Otherwise there would have been no reason to transfer the trial to Jerusalem, except to amuse the petty vanity of the Sanhedrin and deceive it.
The apostle also understood the question in this latter sense, as is clear from his answer.
Festus, "while he did not yet know the Jews and had not received honors from them, answered justly" (verse 4). "But when he had been in Jerusalem, he also began to please them, and not merely to please them, but with servility" (Chrysostom).
Festus had to ask Paul, "Do you wish?" Once Paul had been handed over to the judgment of a higher Roman judicial authority, he could not be forced, as a Roman citizen, to transfer the case to the former court.
The Roman procurator held judgment in the name of Caesar. The procurator probably had no doubt that Paul would answer his question negatively.
Yet he proposed it because he wished to do something pleasing to the Jews. He also wanted to show that his refusal to grant their request (verse 4) did not come from ill will toward them.
Rather, it depended on the accused himself. Against his will, according to Roman law, he could not be placed again before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.
Paul understood the question properly and answered as one would expect. He decisively refused to stand again before the Sanhedrin, even in the presence of the procurator. He expresses this refusal both positively and negatively.