Hl 63 The European Arrest Warrant Opt In

The EAW provides for the surrender from one EU Member State to another of those accused or convicted of crimes. It replaced existing extradition proceedings between Member States and was designed to speed up and simplify the transfer of suspected criminals and fugitives. Under the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty, the UK had the option to opt out of all of the pre-Lisbon Treaty EU justice and home affairs legislation. In October 2012, the Government confirmed that it would make use of this provision to opt out of approximately 130 measures and that it would seek to opt back into 35, including the EAW. On 1 December 2014 the UK's opt-out will come into effect (though negotiations are underway to extend that deadline on a transitional basis to 7 December). If the UK has not opted back in by this date, it will no longer be part of the EAW scheme. The issue of the UK's opt-in, and the EAW in particular, has become an increasingly political topic and entwined with arguments about the EU more generally. The evidence session covered a number of issues relating to the EAW. It juxtaposed the two political arguments on this controversial issue by hearing from Baroness Ludford, in favour of opting in and working to improve the legislation and Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, who opposes the opt-in, calling for an alternative system that is not coming under the competence of the European Union and it remains a matter of UK law.

This collection of essays by leading academics, lawyers, parliamentarians and parliamentary officials provides a critical assessment of the UK Parliament's two main constitutional roles-as a legislature and as the preeminent institution for calling government to account. Both functions are undergoing change and facing new challenges. Part 1 (Legislation) includes chapters on Parliament's emerging responsibilities for pre-legislative scrutiny of government Bills and for evaluating proposed legislation against explicit constitutional standards. The impact on legislation of the European Union and the growing influence of the House of Lords are also examined. Part 2 (Accountability) investigates how Parliament operates to scrutinise areas of executive action previously often shielded from effective parliamentary oversight, including national security, war-making powers and administrative justice. There are also chapters on parliamentary reform, including analysis of the House of Commons 'Wright reforms', parliamentary sovereignty, privilege and the European Convention on Human Rights, Euroscepticism, and parliamentary sovereignty and the regulation of lobbyists. The book will be of interest to anyone who is curious about the work of Parliament and is aimed at legal academics, practitioners and political scientists.

This two-volume book, published open access, brings together leading scholars of constitutional law from twenty-nine European countries to revisit the role of national constitutions at a time when decision-making has increasingly shifted to the European and transnational level. It offers important insights into three areas. First, it explores how constitutions reflect the transfer of powers from domestic to European and global institutions. Secondly, it revisits substantive constitutional values, such as the protection of constitutional rights, the rule of law, democratic participation and constitutional review, along with constitutional court judgments that tackle the protection of these rights and values in the transnational context, e.g. with regard to the Data Retention Directive, the European Arrest Warrant, the ESM Treaty, and EU and IMF austerity measures. The responsiveness of the ECJ regarding the above rights and values, along with the standard of protection, is also assessed. Thirdly, challenges in the context of global governance in relation to judicial review, democratic control and accountability are examined. On a broader level, the contributors were also invited to reflect on what has increasingly been described as the erosion or ‘twilight’ of constitutionalism, or a shift to a thin version of the rule of law, democracy and judicial review in the context of Europeanisation and globalisation processes. The national reports are complemented by a separately published comparative study, which identifies a number of broader trends and challenges that are shared across several Member States and warrant wider discussion. The research for this publication and the comparative study were carried out within the framework of the ERC-funded project ‘The Role and Future of National Constitutions in European and Global Governance’. The book is aimed at scholars, researchers, judges and legal advisors working on the interface between national constitutional law and EU and transnational law. The extradition cases are also of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of criminal law. Anneli Albi is Professor of European Law at the University of Kent, United Kingdom. Samo Bardutzky is Assistant Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.

This report covers the work of the Committee and its sub-committees during the 2014-15 Session.

This report concludes that the Government should seek to rejoin the 35 measures that have already been identified, but that it should also seek to rejoin an additional set of measures: implementing measures related to Europol's continued operation; the Framework Decision on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law; the European Judicial Network; the European Probation Order; and the Convention of Driving Disqualifications. The Government has still not dealt with earlier reports' conclusions about the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and its jurisdiction. What is more, the Government's general approach to the CJEU is not consistent with its decision to opt back into many other post-Lisbon police and criminal justice measures. The Government also needs to work flexibly with the European Commission in order to avoid any gaps in the application of the measures the UK will seek to rejoin. For example, we must ensure that rejoining the European Arrest Warrant is water-tight well in advance of the opt-out taking effect, to prevent problems for our criminal justice system. The report also recommends that the Government conduct a review of the impact of the opt-out decision three years after it has taken effect, and report its conclusions to Parliament

A compelling new history of the EU and the people who sought to shape and challenge it—from Maastricht to today The European Union is the most ambitious, and one of the most contentious, international organizations ever created. Decisions made in Brussels shape the lives of over 500 million Europeans, and its laws and policies resonate around the world. But how has the EU endured over three turbulent decades marred by crises at home and abroad? In this major account, Dermot Hodson traces the development of the EU from its establishment in 1993 through to Brexit, Covid-19, and the invasion of Ukraine. Hodson shows how the union has been held together not by faceless technocrats but national leaders who stood together in times of turmoil despite a fierce backlash from a new generation of right-wing populists. Circle of Stars offers a rich appraisal of Europe’s troubled past and turbulent present—focusing on the people who built the EU as we know it today.

The report EU Police and Criminal Justice Measures: The UK's 2014 Op-out Option (HL 159) examines the consequences to the UK should the Government choose to opt-out of approximately 130 EU police and criminal justice measures, that were adopted before the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009. The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is the single most important pre-Lisbon police and criminal justice measure and, if the Government decides to exercise the opt-out, the Committee recommends that it should opt back in to the EAW immediately, to avoid any gap in its application. The Committee also expresses particular concern about the potential impact that the opt-out, including the loss of the EAW, could have on efforts by the UK and Ireland to effectively tackle cross-border crime, and does not believe that possible alternatives to the EAW would be adequate. The Committee concludes that the Government has not made a convincing case to opt-out and that to do so would h