DOCSLIB.ORG

Tilburg University Quid Pro Quo? a Comparative Law Perspective on The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Tilburg University Quid Pro Quo? A comparative law perspective on the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters Ouwerkerk, J.W. Publication date: 2011 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication in Tilburg University Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Ouwerkerk, J. W. (2011). Quid Pro Quo? A comparative law perspective on the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters. Intersentia. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 05. okt. 2021 QUID PRO QUO? A COMPARATIVE LAW PERSPECTIVE ON THE MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS Jannemieke Ouwerkerk Cambridge – Antwerp – Portland Distribution for the UK: Distribution for the USA and Canada: Hart Publishing Ltd. International Specialized Book Services 16C Worcester Place 920 NE 58th Ave. Suite 300 Oxford OX1 2JW Portland, OR 97213 UK USA Tel.: +44 1865 51 75 30 Tel.: +1 800 944 6190 (toll free) Email: [email protected] Tel.: +1 503 287 3093 Email: [email protected] Distribution for Austria: Distribution for other countries: Neuer Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Intersentia Publishers Argentinierstraße 42/6 Groenstraat 31 1040 Wien 2640 Mortsel Austria Belgium Tel.: +43 1 535 61 03 24 Tel.: +32 3 680 15 50 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Quid Pro Quo? A comparative law perspective on the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters Jannemieke Ouwerkerk © 2011 Intersentia Cambridge – Antwerp – Portland www.intersentia.com Cover design: Pjotr Design Studio Editing and typesetting: Steve Lambley Information Design, The Hague ISBN 978-94-000-0176-3 D/2011/7849/18 NUR 824 No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. Quid Pro Quo? A comparative law perspective on the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Tilburg, op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof. dr. Ph. Eijlander, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties aangewezen commissie in de aula van de Universiteit op vrijdag 4 maart 2011 om 14.15 uur door Janne Willemina Ouwerkerk geboren op 1 juni 1981 te Zeist Promotor: Prof. dr. M.S. Groenhuijsen Copromotor: Dr. J.B.H.M. Simmelink Promotiecommissie: Prof. dr. M. Claes Prof. dr. C.J.C.F. Fijnaut Prof. dr. S. Gless Prof. dr. M. Killias Prof. dr. A.H. Klip Acknowledgements This book is the result of doctoral research performed at the Department of Criminal Law of Tilburg Law School. I must say that the Department turned out to be a very inspiring and pleasant environment in which to do scientific research. It proved to be well worth the daily one-hour return rail journey from Utrecht to the campus of Tilburg University. This research could not have been conducted without the support of several other people. Most gratitude by far must be extended to two persons. I owe many thanks to Marc Groenhuijsen. It has been a great honour to work under the coaching of such an outstanding academic. You have read all my drafts from beginning to end and I am so grateful for your useful comments time and time again. I also look back with pleasure on our substantive talks on this research, but also on other issues of criminal law and societal developments. Many thanks must also be extended to Joep Simmelink for his unremitting support and kindness. The distance between our working places in the last two years did not affect your interest in me and my work. Marc and Joep, the two of you have given me much freedom to make my own choices and to develop my own style of doing research and writing. It has been a great experience to work under the supervision of such a golden team. Special thanks go to Cyrille Fijnaut for his willingness to involve me in several kinds of projects (conferences, book editing) and to introduce me to so many people. Also, his love of books combined with his generosity resulted in a significant growth of my personal book collection. I have appreciated it all so much. Your dedication and contribution to the disciplines of criminal law and criminology can only be regarded with deep respect. Let me also mention James Jacobs and Daniel Richman who were willing to meet me during my stay in the USA, and who provided me with useful information and advice. The same gratitude must go to Sabine Gless and Martin Killias who welcomed me in Switzerland and who also spent time and energy reading and commenting on my manuscript. The warm welcome from the four of you, and the enthusiastic reaction to my research topic were very encouraging for me to continue studying the huge amount of information I had to wade through. In addition, I Intersentia v Quid Pro Quo? am very grateful to André Klip and Monica Claes who took the time to read and comment upon my manuscript. Furthermore, I must mention Theo de Roos, one of the nicest and most accessible professors I have ever met. Though not directly involved in my research project, we cooperated on a regular basis with regard to topics of international and European criminal law. In 2006, Theo presented me to the Meijers Committee (the Standing Committee of Experts on International Immigration, Refugee and Criminal Law), of which I am now a member. Being involved in this unique group of people has deepened my interest and passion for the field of criminal law and the position of vulnerable groups of people therein. Indirectly, that has surely contributed to my personal development as a critical researcher. Finally, I have been lucky to be able to benefit from the fabulous collections of the Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Strafrecht (Freiburg i.Br., Germany), the Law Libraries of Basle University and the University of Zürich (both Switzerland), and the Law Libraries of New York University School of Law and Columbia Law School (both New York, NY, USA). Thanks to all those who facilitated my stay at these places. Utrecht, December 2010. vi Intersentia sUMMARY of contents Acknowledgements. v List of Abbreviations. xix INTRODUCTION 1. What is this book about?. 1 2. Reasons to research . 3 3. Central question. .5 4. The structure of this book. .6 5. Research methods. .10 PART I. DEFINING MUTUAL RECOGNITION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: BETWEEN COMMUNITY LAW AND UNION LAW Chapter 1. The Principle of Mutual Recognition in European Community Law. 17 1. Introduction . .17 2. Mutual recognition in the internal market. 19 3. Mutual recognition of judicial decisions in civil and commercial matters. .33 4. Concluding remarks. .43 Chapter 2. The Principle of Mutual Recognition in European Union Law. 45 1. Introduction . .45 2. Mutual recognition in the Third Pillar: from Tampere to Lisbon. 46 3. The analogy between mutual recognition in different fields of competence .54 4. Defining mutual recognition in the context of criminal law. 65 5. Implementing mutual recognition in criminal matters: the need for a specific approach . .69 6. Concluding remarks. .77 Intersentia vii Quid Pro Quo? TRANSITIONAL PART. THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS OF THE PRINCIPLE OF MUTUAL RECOGNITION IN UNION LAW: THE IDENTIFICATION OF OBSTACLES AND BOTTLENECKS Chapter 3. Implementing Mutual Recognition: Obstacles and Bottlenecks . 81 1. Introduction . .81 2. Implementing the principle of mutual recognition: an overview of legal instruments. 82 3. The scope of mutual recognition in the light of the parameters . 91 4. Obstacles and bottlenecks in implementing mutual recognition . 111 5. Concluding remarks. 126 PART II. RECOGNITION OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS IN CRIMINAL MATTERS IN THE FEDERATIONS OF SWITZERLAND AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: LESSONS FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION Chapter 4. Recognition of Judicial Decisions in Criminal Matters: the Case of Switzerland. 129 1. Introduction . 129 2. The federation of Switzerland. 130 3. The Swiss criminal justice system. .136 4. Mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters?. .144 5. Assessing the EU parameters. 157 6. Concluding remarks. 172 Chapter 5. Recognition of Judicial Decisions in Criminal Matters: the Case of America. .175 1. Introduction . 175 2. The United States of America. 176 3. The American criminal justice system. .182 4. Mutual recognition of judicial decisions in criminal matters?. .191 5. Assessing the EU parameters. 222 6. Concluding remarks. 238 Chapter 6. Analysis: The European Union, Switzerland and the United States of America Compared. .241 1. Introduction . 241 2. The obstacles and bottlenecks in implementing mutual recognition: the European Union, Swiss and American approaches side by side . 242 3. The fundamental similarities and differences explained and assessed. 250 4. Lessons for the future of mutual recognition in the European Union . 266 5. Concluding remarks. 285 viii Intersentia Summary of Contents Epilogue. .287 Summary. 291 Bibliography. 301 Table of Cases . 315 Intersentia ix Table of contents Acknowledgements. v List of Abbreviations.
Recommended publications
  • Duits Engels Frans S

    Duits Engels Frans S

    Hieronder staan diverse juridische uitdrukkingen. Daarachter staan de vertalingen, respectievelijk in het: Duits Engels Frans Spaans Aangifte doen Anzeige erstatten lay en information Porter / déposer plainte denunciar (un delito) Aangifte (valse) falsche Anzeige (lay an) false charge fausse déclaration denuncia falsa Aangrijpen, vatten, pakken stellen, fassen, ergreifen to apprehend Appréhender aprehender Aanhangig maken anhängig machen Institutie proceedings porter (une action) devant entablar (un proceso) Aanhouden van zaak Aussetzen stay the proceedings suspendré Ie procés suspender Aanhouden van verdachte vorläufig festnehmen Arrest arréter provisoirement detener Aanhouden van vonnis Aussetzen defer judgment surseoir á statuer aplazar (la sentencia) Aanhouding van verdachte vorläufige Festnahme Arrest arrestation (provisoire) detencion Aanhouding van zaak Aussetzung stay of proceedings suspension du procés suspension Aanhouding van vonnis Ausselzung deferment of judgment sursis á statuer aplazamiento Aanhouding voorlopige vorläufige Festnahme provisional arrest arrestation provisoire detención preventiva Aanhoudingsbevel Haftbefehl warrant for the arrest of mandat d'arret orden de detención Aanklacht Anklage; Anschuldigung, Be- charge; indictment; arraignment dénonciation; plainte; accusation querella; acusación Zichtiging Aanklacht lasterlijk verleumderische Anklacht defamatory accusation dénunciation calomnieuse queralla calumniosa Aanmaning van getuige Zeugenbelehrung urge (a witness to speak the enjoindre te témoin de dire la
  • STREET HARASSMENT Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom, USA

    STREET HARASSMENT Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom, USA

    E-Avis ISDC 18-020 STREET HARASSMENT Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom, USA Current to: 10.08.2018 Please refer to as: K.Nadakavukaren / A. Aronovitz / S. De Dycker / J. Fournier / C. Viennet / H. Westermark, Street Harassment, current to : 10.08.2018, E-Avis ISDC 2018-20, available on www.isdc.ch. This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. The Swiss Institute of Comparative Law does not accept liability for any other use of the text. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the Institute. E-Avis ISDC Série de publications électroniques d’avis de droit de l’ISDC / Elektronische Publikationsreihe von Gutachten des SIR / Serie di pubblicazioni elettroniche di pareri dell’Istituto svizzero di diritto comparato / Series of Electronic Publications of Legal Opinions of the SICL 18-074 2 Inhaltsverzeichnis I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 5 II. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG ........................................................................................................... 7 III. VERGLEICHENDE RESULTATE ................................................................................................. 8 A. ARGENTINA ........................................................................................................................ 11 1. Définition juridique ..................................................................................................................
  • THE NORMALIZATION of PROSTITUTION in SWITZERLAND: the ORIGIN of POLICIES Corinne Isler University of Helsinki Marjut Jyrkinen University of Helsinki

    THE NORMALIZATION of PROSTITUTION in SWITZERLAND: the ORIGIN of POLICIES Corinne Isler University of Helsinki Marjut Jyrkinen University of Helsinki

    Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence Volume 3 | Issue 2 Article 4 April 2018 The orN malization of Prostitution in Switzerland: The Origin of Policies Corinne Isler University of Helsinki, [email protected] Marjut Jyrkinen University of Helsinki, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/dignity Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons, European Law Commons, Inequality and Stratification Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Law and Society Commons, Other International and Area Studies Commons, Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation Commons, Political Economy Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, Public Policy Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons, and the Social Control, Law, Crime, and Deviance Commons Recommended Citation Isler, Corinne and Jyrkinen, Marjut (2018) "The orN malization of Prostitution in Switzerland: The Origin of Policies," Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence: Vol. 3: Iss. 2, Article 4. DOI: 10.23860/dignity.2018.03.02.04 Available at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/dignity/vol3/iss2/4https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/dignity/vol3/iss2/4 This Research and Scholarly Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The orN malization of Prostitution in Switzerland: The Origin of Policies Abstract In this article, we examine how socio-political actors frame prostitution and problems attached to the phenomenon and what types of policies they suggest.
  • Empirical Assessment of Copyright Enforcement: a Comparative Study of the Music Industry in the P.R.C

    Empirical Assessment of Copyright Enforcement: a Comparative Study of the Music Industry in the P.R.C

    Empirical Assessment of Copyright Enforcement: A Comparative Study of the Music Industry in the P.R.C. and the R.O.C. By Gi-Kuen Li A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Juridical Science in the Graduate Division Of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Robert P. Merges, Chair Professor Peter S. Menell Professor Brian D. Wright Spring 2016 Empirical Assessment of Copyright Enforcement: A Comparative Study of the Music Industry in the P.R.C. and the R.O.C. Copyright © 2016 by Gi-Kuen Jacob Li Abstract Abstract Empirical Assessment of Copyright Enforcement: A Comparative Study of the Music Industry in the P.R.C. and the R.O.C. by Gi-Kuen Jacob Li Doctor of Juridical Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Robert P. Merges, Chair Since 2000, the revenue of the music industry plummeted worldwide. Meanwhile, the advancement of technology created many changes that impacted the copyright law system, which raised doubts about the effectiveness and necessity of copyright law system. Many literatures related to this topic focused on the discussion about the North America and the Europe regions. In the past two decades, researchers started to explore the intellectual property right protection in the P.R.C.; however, few works emphasized the comparative perspective between the copyright protection in the P.R.C. and the R.O.C. This dissertation argues that copyright law is still important to encourage and reward creativity. Under the utilitarian rationale, copyright law should be able to maintain incentive for authors and creators.
  • Promoting Prosecutorial Accountability, Independence and Effectiveness

    Promoting Prosecutorial Accountability, Independence and Effectiveness

    This book represents a comparative research of the prosecution institution in nine diff erent OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE countries. The main objective of the compara- SOFIA tive analysis is to identify the international stan- dards and best practices in terms of account- Solunska str. 56 ability, eff ectiveness and independence of the Sofia 1000 prosecution services. The study should guide Tel.: (+359 2) 930 66 19 and enrich national debates in countries where PROMOTINGPROMOTING Fax: (+359 2) 951 63 48 the prosecution needs to be reformed. In the last twenty years there have been sig- PROSECUTORIALPROSECUTORIAL www.osi.bg nifi cant changes in criminal procedure and in public prosecution in many parts of the world. ACCOUNTABILITY,ACCOUNTABILITY, The reports included in the volume aim, in part, to examine some important instances and ex- INDEPENDENCEINDEPENDENCE ANDAND amples of that trend. The country reports repre- sent a broad range of practices and approaches EFFECTIVENESSEFFECTIVENESS about the manner of organization of the pros- ecution service. The focus of the research is on Comparative Research the lessons learned from the reform in demo- cratic states and the challenges for the coun- tries in transition in designing the prosecution institution. The comparative research shows that there is JUSTICE not a universal model of prosecutorial indepen- dence and accountability. Hence, the reformers and decision makers have on their disposition a large variety of approaches to choose from on the occasion of a concrete reform. However, they should have in mind an important fi nd- JUSTICE ing of the comparative analysis, namely—im- porting an apparently successful element of a reform should not necessarily produce the ex- PROMOTING PROSECUTORIAL ACCOUNTABILITY, ACCOUNTABILITY, PROSECUTORIAL PROMOTING INDEPENDENCE AND EFFECTIVENESS pected positive results.