The European Criminal Law Associations' Forum 2010
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
eucrim 2010 / 2 THE EUROPEAN CRIMINAL LAW ASSOCIATIONS‘ FORUM Focus: The Lisbon Treaty Dossier particulier: Le Traité de Lisbonne Schwerpunktthema: Der Vertrag von Lissabon Editorial Viviane Reding / Algirdas Šemeta The Lisbon Treaty. A Critical Analysis of Its Impact on EU Criminal Law Dr. Ester Herlin-Karnell Solutions Offered by the Lisbon Treaty Margherita Cerizza European Criminal Justice under the Lisbon Treaty Dr. Agnieszka Serzysko The Cooperation and Verification Mechanism in Bulgaria Gergana Marinova / Iskra Uzunova 2010 / 2 ISSUE / ÉDITION / AUSGABE Contents News* Articles European Union The Lisbon Treaty Foundations Procedural Criminal Law 59 The Lisbon Treaty. A Critical Analysis 39 The Stockholm Programme 48 Data Protection of Its Impact on EU Criminal Law 39 Reform of the European Union 51 Jurisdiction Dr. Ester Herlin-Karnell 39 Schengen 52 Victim Protection 52 Freezing of Assets 65 Solutions Offered by the Lisbon Treaty Institutions Margherita Cerizza 40 Council Cooperation 40 OLAF 52 Police Cooperation 69 European Criminal Justice under 40 Agency for Fundamental Rights 53 Judicial Cooperation the Lisbon Treaty (FRA) 54 European Arrest Warrant Dr. Agnieszka Serzysko 41 Europol 55 Law Enforcement Cooperation 41 Eurojust 76 The Cooperation and Verification Mechanism 42 European Judicial Network in Bulgaria. Its Role for the Successful (EJN) Implementation of the Mutual Recognition 43 Frontex Council of Europe Principle in Criminal Matters Gergana Marinova / Iskra Uzunova Specific Areas of Crime / Foundations Substantive Criminal Law 56 European Court of Human Rights 44 VAT/Tax Fraud 56 Other Human Rights Issues 44 Fraud Imprint 44 Money Laundering Specific Areas of Crime 44 Organised Crime 56 Corruption 46 Cybercrime 57 Money Laundering 46 Environmental Crime 47 Illegal Immigration Procedural Criminal Law 48 Homophobia 48 Sexual Violence Legislation * News contain internet links referring to more detailed information. These links can be easily accessed either by clicking on the respective ID-number of the desired link in the online-journal or – for print version readers – by accessing our webpage www.mpicc.de/eucrim/search.php and then entering the ID-number of the link in the search form. Editorial Dear Readers, The Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force at the end of 2009 mandates the Union to establish a true European area of jus- tice reinforcing mutual trust and enabling mutual recognition of Member States judicial decisions. This will require, among others, elements as diverse as the strengthening of Eurojust, the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the reform of the European Anti Fraud Office (Of- fice Européen de la Lutte Anti-Fraude – OLAF) and common minimum standards in the justice process (such as fair trial rights, prison conditions and rights of victims of crime). At the April Justice and Home Affairs Council the Commis- sion gave an initial outline of its ideas for the future of a Euro- pean judicial area. We will pursue our reflection in the coming months. As the EU commissioners for Justice on the one hand and Taxation and Customs Union, and Audit and Anti-Fraud Viviane Reding Algirdas Šemeta on the other hand, we are committed to promoting a combined approach mixing legislative and institutional means to rein- force the Union’s capabilities to prevent and fight fraud affect- The Commission has since 2001 conducted a reflection on the ing its financial interests. feasibility and the value added of an EPPO based on its Green paper which ultimately led to the insertion of the concept of The Stockholm Programme, adopted in 2009, gives the outline the EPPO as a possibility in the Lisbon Treaty. of many of the changes which have to take place in the years to come. The Commission has defined an ambitious action Under the provisions of Article 86 TFEU, an EPPO may now plan for 2010–2014 to implement the Stockholm programme. be established from EUROJUST in order to combat crimes The implementation of the programme will help to further the affecting the financial interests of the Union. This will include mutual acceptance of the different judicial systems within the the strengthening of EUROJUST. We will continue to work Member States by building up trust: trust in each others judi- closely together on this necessary project. cial decisions, trust in each others law enforcement and judi- cial authorities. The citizens must be confident that the judicial OLAF’s experience shows that criminal prosecution could proceedings throughout the Union are fair and that their rights benefit from having a function at EU level to supplement are respected – no matter where in the EU. OLAF administrative investigations. Also Eurojust already plays a useful role of coordination and its powers may be fur- Also in line with this action plan, the Commission will pre- ther strengthened under Article 85 TFEU in this regard. There pare the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor’s Of- is a need to centralise information and enforce the law, keep- fice (EPPO) from Eurojust to investigate, prosecute and bring ing in mind that, in the national legal systems, prosecutions to judgement offences against the Union’s financial interests. are not always launched or completed in an effective way to Its aim is clear: to protect the European tax-payer and pursue protect the EU’s financial interests. cases where EU funds are being ripped off by fraudsters and when local law enforcement does not have the means to take The setting-up of an EPPO ultimately requires the adoption the necessary action to protect the EU’s budget. of legislation on its functions, tasks and rules of procedure. eucrim 2 /2010 | 37 THE LISBON TREATY Rules on the admissibility of evidence and on judicial review it for future challenges, including OLAF’s relationship with are also indispensable. A thorough reflection involving all pro- Eurojust and with the future EPPO. fessionals with relevant experience is needed. We are aware that “Eucrim” is a forum which can contribute to this debate. It The ultimate aim of all these actions and projects underway allows views to be expressed and information to be exchanged is to build upon mutual confidence and trust. Trust that the between lawyers of all the Member States. By disseminating taxpayers’ money is not wasted or misused by fraudsters. The information on relevant legal and administrative develop- goal is to ensure mutual trust in the judicial systems of all ments in the European Union, it contributes to build mutual Member States and confidence by the citizens that their rights trust. And it is of crucial importance to foster the debate on and interests are being safeguarded. how to carry out at European level an assessment of the way the system will work in the end. Viviane Reding In preparing the EPPO, we will further reflect on the EPPO’s Vice-President of the European Commission, EU Com- cooperation with other actors, including and in particular with missioner responsible for Justice, Fundamental Rights and OLAF. The reform of OLAF is well under way. The Commis- Citizenship sion submitted a reflection paper in July 2010. It is our inten- tion that the legislative process concludes by the end of 2011. Algirdas Šemeta It is a relatively limited although important reform, as it aims EU Commissioner responsible for Taxation and Customs to improve OLAF’s efficiency and effectiveness and prepare Union, Audit and Anti-Fraud 38 | eucrim 2 / 2010 News Actualités / Kurzmeldungen accession of the European Union to the ECHR. In this report, the EP points out a number of institutional issues regarding the EU’s accession to the ECHR such as the appointment of a judge to the Euro- pean Court of Human Rights (see also eucrim 1/2010, p. 3). Article 218 of the European Union* Treaty on European Union laid down that the EP should be informed of all Reported by Dr. Els De Busser (EDB), Sabrina Staats (ST), stages of the negotiations. Cornelia Riehle (CR) and Nevena Kostova (NK) By adopting the mandate, the Com- mission has been given clear guidelines for the negotiations with the Council of mission to only take initiatives regarding Europe. (EDB) Foundations measures which are in conformity with eucrim ID=1002002 the Stockholm Programme. By June The Stockholm Programme 2012, the Commission is asked to pre- sent a mid-term review of the implemen- Conclusions on the Action Plan tation of the Programme. (EDB) Schengen Implementing the Stockholm eucrim ID=1002001 Programme Amendments to Regulations on SIS II During the Justice and Home Affairs After the EP’s consent to amending the Council from 3-4 June 2010, the Coun- legal instruments governing the transi- cil adopted conclusions on the Com- Reform of the European Union tion of the SIS 1+ database to the SIS II, mission Communication “Delivering an the Council adopted two new Regula- area of freedom, security and justice for Negotiating Mandate for Accession tions at its meeting on 3-4 June 2010 Europe’s citizens − Action Plan Imple- of EU to ECHR Adopted (see also eucrim 1/2010, p. 3). The ex- menting the Stockholm Programme”. The Council adopted the negotiation isting instruments were to expire on The Action Plan (see also eucrim mandate for the accession of the EU 30 June 2010, and delays in making the 1/2010, p. 2) of the Commission sets out to the European Convention of Human SIS II operational have made it neces- the concrete measures and timetables for Rights (ECHR) on the JHA meeting sary to amend these instruments. implementing the objectives laid down from 3-4 June 2010. In April 2010, the The two new Regulations amending in the Stockholm Programme (see also Commission had sent out its Recom- Decision 2008/839/JHA and Regulation eucrim 4/2009, pp.