Mutual Trust Under Pressure The Transferring Of Sentenced Persons In The Eu

This book develops a conceptual framework of the principle of mutual trust in EU criminal law. Mutual trust is a household term in the EU criminal law vocabulary and is widely regarded to be a prerequisite for a successful application of mutual recognition. But despite its importance, the parameters of the concept are not clear. The book demonstrates that mutual trust is multi-faceted: combining the elements essential to a successful EU criminal law, as part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The book approaches trust from multiple angles. First, a study of social science literature. Second, a meticulous assessment of mutual trust in EU criminal law. Third, a study of trust in US interstate criminal justice cooperation. Finally, the book identifies a comprehensive approach to tackle trust related difficulties in EU criminal law. This timely book will be of great interest to anyone looking to gain a full picture of this core principle in EU criminal law.

The volume proposes a breakthrough analysis of defence rights in criminal proceedings, through the lens of a computable approach to the law. It presents a multi-level research, tackling EU law, national legislation, and case-law across the European Union.

There is substantial disagreement in academic literature over how to address the tensions between the application of mutual recognition and the safeguarding of individual rights, particularly in the EU's criminal justice arena. This book investigates those tensions by re-examining the nature of mutual recognition in European law from an individual rights perspective. A key question is the role played by mutual recognition in the process of reconciling free movement and other interests. The book contains a comparative analysis of mutual recognition in the internal market and the 'area of freedom, security, and justice.' It assesses mutual recognition in the context of the aims of both areas, as well as the principles of European law and norms laid down in primary/secondary EU law. The analysis follows mutual recognition in the fields of product requirements, professional qualifications, and judicial decisions in criminal matters. The book concludes that the core function of mutual recognition has been obscured by assertions made by EU policy makers regarding its consequences, which fail to distinguish between policy objectives, integration methods, and legal obligations. This has also led to a debate among academics and an interpretation of mutual recognition by the Court of Justice which presents an unnecessary conflict between the application of mutual recognition and the safeguarding of individual rights. It is argued that, for mutual recognition to have a stable future in the EU criminal justice area, clarity regarding its aims is urgently required and individual rights need to be enhanced, both in judicial cooperation measures and through harmonization of suspects' rights in criminal proceedings. (Series: Ius Commune Europaeum - Vol. 138) [Subject: European Law, Human Rights Law, Criminal Justice]

En 2019, 40 ans après la première élection des membres du Parlement européen au suffrage universel direct en 1979, les citoyens de l’Union étaient une neuvième fois appelés aux urnes. Entre ces deux dates, le Parlement européen a profondément changé, passant d’une simple assemblée consultative au colégislateur de droit commun d’une Union européenne en proie à de nombreuses crises. Les contributions au présent ouvrage, tirées des travaux d’un colloque international qui s’est tenu à l’Université de Bordeaux les 9 et 10 mai 2019, entendent dresser le bilan, les enjeux et les perspectives, tant des élections européennes de 2019 que de la démocratie représentative européenne de façon globale. In 2019, 40 years after the first election of members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage in 1979, the citizens of the Union were called to the polls for the ninth time. Between these two dates, the European Parliament changed dramatically, from a mere consultative assembly to the ordinary co-legislator of a European Union plagued by many crises. This book draws on an international conference held at the University of Bordeaux on May 9 and 10, 2019. The various contributions therein intend to take stock, examine the challenges and envisage the prospects, not only of the 2019 European elections but also of representative European democracy in general.

The fight against impunity is an increasingly central concept in EU law-making and adjudication. What is the meaning and the scope of impunity as a legal concept in the EU legal order? How does the fight against impunity influence policy and adjudication? This timely first piece of comprehensive research aims to to address these largely unexplored questions, which involve structural institutional and substantive dilemmas underpinning the most recent developments of the European integration process. In recent years, the fight against impunity has become a pressing concern for the European institutions. It has shaped several EU policies and has led to a recurring argument in the case law of the Court of Justice. The book sheds light on this elusive notion, providing a much needed conceptual appraisal. The first section examines the scope of the notion of impunity, and its role in the EU decision-making process and in the development of EU competences. Subsequent sections discuss the implications of impunity - and of the fight against it - in a variety of complementary domains, namely the allocation of criminal jurisdiction, mutual recognition instruments, the rise of new surveillance technologies and the external dimension of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. This book is an original and timely contribution to scholarship, which is of interest to academics, researchers and policy-makers alike.

Forced Mobility of EU Citizens is a critical evaluation from an empirical perspective of existing practices of the use of transnational criminal justice instruments within the European Union. Such instruments include the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), prisoner transfer procedures and criminal law-related deportations. The voices and experiences of people transferred across internal borders of the European Union are brought to the fore in this book. Another area explored is the scope and value of EU citizenship rights in light of cooperation not just between judicial authorities of EU Member States, but criminal justice systems in general, including penitentiary institutions. The novelty of the book lays not only in the fact that it brings to the fore a topic that so far has been under-researched, but it also brings together academics and studies from different parts of Europe – from the west (i.e. the expelling countries) and the east (the receiving countries, with a special focus on two of the jurisdictions most affected by these processes – Poland and Romania). It therefore exposes processes that have so far been hidden, shows the links between sending and receiving countries, and elaborates on the harms caused by those instruments and the very idea of ‘justice’ behind them. This book also introduces a new element to deportation studies as it links to them the institution of the European Arrest Warrant and EU law transfers targeting prisoners and sentenced individuals. With a combination of legal, criminological, and sociological perspectives, this book will be of great interest to scholars and students with an interest in EU law, criminal law, transnational criminal justice, migration/immigration, and citizenship. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license and funded by Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Law Studies.

the EU Member States are equally authoritative, which leads to serious compli- tions. After all, translations are always inferior to the original texts. The conclusion by Advocate-General Kokott in the Pupino case may lead to a practical solution: just use the language/text that reflects the intention of the drafters of the Fra- work Decision most clearly, regardless of the ‘nationality’ of the case. In the case of the EAW Framework Decision the French text is more authentic than any other text: reliable information from Brussels has taught me that all language versions have been translated from the French. Moreover, the negotiations on this Fra- work Decision were mostly in French. And so I can now return, with a clear conscience, to my natural state: easygoing if not actually lazy. Judge Rob Blekxtoon VII Chapter 0 INTRODUCTION We, Europeans, are participants in the shaping of Europe as a political, cultural and constitutional community, a common home in a messy world. We, lawyers, are responsible for channelling this process and for guarding balance. The balance we have to guard is between the three identities of every European citizen: his or her European, national and individual identity. For our European identity to bloom, it is necessary that our national and individual identities also bloom.