The authors share their first impressions of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement in criminal law. After looking at how the Agreement came about and speculating about alternatives, criticism regarding the Agreement is voiced. This concerns the lack of transparency in the legislative process on a general level. Regarding the individual provisions, further points of criticism as well as such of particular interest are identified with reference to the respective articles in this issue. The first impression that the Agreement was developed quickly, without systematic approach, and thus leaves many loopholes and uncertainties, is confirmed. To conclude, however, some positive achievements are also highlighted.

No abstract

The TCA is already 'provisionally' applicable as of 1 January 2021. On the EU side, the legislative process, including required notifications from all EU Member States, is not yet finalised at the date of writing this editorial (31 January 2021). The UK has already implemented the TCA into its domestic legislation. It published the European Union (Future Relationship) Bill on 29 December 2020, accepted by its Parliament 1 day later. Just on time, by 31 December 2020, the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020 came into force. After publishing a first general commentary on social media 1 in relation to Part III of the TCA, which addresses law enforcement and cooperation in criminal matters, an extraordinarily strong feedback showed that a quick, yet more thorough in-depth analysis and commentary of this bulk of new and confusing provisions is necessary. To our great delight, Irene Wieczorek and Vania Costa Ramos of NJECL were immediately enthusiastic about this idea. Without their ongoing commitment and the full support of the NJECL this publication would not have been possible in the envisaged short period of time. We are also extremely grateful to our co-authors, all recognised international criminal law experts. In a joint effort, we managed to complete this difficult task, and are happy to present a provisional analysis of a provisional text already now. It is important to take a closer look at the TCA's provisions governing criminal law, since they are not only difficult to digest, but, more importantly, they are already applied in practice. Uncertainties in interpretation and regulatory gaps run like a red thread through all the compiled essays. The most striking, however, remains the actual threat the TCA poses to human rights, which can hardly be underestimated. This threat is manifested particularly in three aspects:

This article provides an analysis of the new provisions in the EUUK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) that govern Mutual Legal Assistance in criminal matters. While only few provisions of the European Investigation Order are picked up by the TCA, it is mostly based on the Council of Europe’s European Mutual Assistance Convention of 1959. An overview on applicable law is provided, after which a closer look is taken at procedural aspects in general as well as specific differences between previously applicable and new provisions. In this respect, two conditions for issuing a request are considered, namely availability in similar domestic cases and proportionality. Grounds for refusal, provisional measures and legal remedies also are highlighted. The authors conclude that the new provisions leave a lot of unanswered questions and that while mutual legal assistance can continue, it will happen at reduced pace.

No abstract