Criminal Law and Policy in the European Union

Miettinen, Samuli

doi:10.4324/9780203077337

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We can say that this is a particular model of cooperation based on the principle of mutual recognition which allows us to argue that the protection of fundamental rights necessarily passes to the control of the judicial authorities of the Member States (Suominen, 2011;Janssens, 2013;Miettinen, 2013;Klimek, 2017). In reality, it is up to the judicial body to resolve the related dispute to all the situations just referred to.…”

Section: Regulation (Eu) 2018/1805 and Protection Of Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

European criminal cooperation: Confiscation and protection of human rights in the post Brexit period

Phil¹

2023

YIECPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work tries to analyze the international cooperation models in the field of seizure and confiscation that are defined in a limited space through the Conventions of the Council of Europe of 1990 and 2005. We proceed with the latest Regulation (EU) 2018/1805 as well as with the agreement on trade and cooperation of 24 December 2020. Note the points of reference and analysis of all three models and operating schemes on the protection of human rights. We also focused on the post-Brexit situation where the United Kingdom, despite its exit from the Union hall, will have to comply with the standards of protection of rights as established by Union law, interpreted by the CJEU and with the aim of continuing the criminal cooperation with the other Member States of the Union.

show abstract

Section: Regulation (Eu) 2018/1805 and Protection Of Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

European criminal cooperation: Confiscation and protection of human rights in the post Brexit period

Phil¹

2023

YIECPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the different opt-outs, 3 a number of provisions of the Treaty emphasize respect of national sovereignty in security and criminal matters. For example, harmonization in criminal law shall take place by means of Directives (Articles 82(2), 83(1) and (2) TFEU), leaving considerable margin for manoeuvre to Member States on the implementation of EU law (for a detailed overview see Miettinen, 2013;Mitsilegas, 2010). In addition, articles 82(3) and 83(3) TFEU, provide an 'emergency brake' mechanism, which enables Member States to suspend the legislative process if a draft directive affects fundamental aspects of their criminal justice systems (Peers, 2008).…”

Section: Policing and Criminal Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…European Communities vs Council of the European Union [2007] ECR I-9097). SeeMiettinen, 2013 andÖberg, 2017a.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

From Legal to Political Reasoning: National Parliaments' Use of Reasoned Opinions in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice^*

Tacea¹

2021

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Lisbon Treaty emphasized the importance of subsidiarity control in relation to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). The article demonstrates that the types of reasoning national parliaments use to raise subsidiarity objections in the AFSJ depend less on the institutional strength of national parliaments in EU affairs and more on the institutional evolution and material scope of EU proposals. Relying on the AFSJ case, the article shows that national parliaments use a narrow legal interpretation of subsidiarity when the EU legislation threatens Member States' legal traditions and State powers. However, concerns about the respect of national legal diversity are replaced by a more political approach to subsidiarity control when politically sensitive and contentious issues are at stake.

show abstract

“…Currently, a large number of theorists and jurists point out that by the manner of establishing criminal jurisdictions of the Union the Treaty of Lisbon actually establishes the legal basis for the creation and development of EU criminal law (Mitsilegas 2016, Klip 2016, Diez 2015, Miettinen 2014, Gilmore 2008. Namely, if we draw a parallel with national criminal justice systems, it is obvious that the content of supranational criminal jurisdictions of the Union (Article 82 TFEU) reflects contours of substantive EU criminal law (definitions of crimes and sanctions) and EU criminal procedure law (mutual recognition of evidence, the rights of persons in criminal proceedings, and the rights of victims), with the explicit establishment of the jurisdiction of the Union over certain serious criminal offenses representing the basis for the emergence of a special part of the Union criminal law.…”

Section: Criminal Jurisdiction Of the Eu In Accordance With The Treat...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of criminal jurisdiction of the European Union

Vasilkov

Зоранчо

Lazić

et al. 2021

JAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The criminal jurisdictions of the European Community and subsequently the European Union began to develop as subsidiary competencies aimed at protecting economic and industry policies established by the founding treaties. Their development has pointed to the necessity of using forced measures for the preventing abuse and countering criminal activities in the area of the customs union and the common market. This paper presents the gradual transfer of limited criminal jurisdictions from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and communitarian law into the contractual competences of the European Union with an explicit legal basis after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. Using the teleological method, the method of the content analysis (of the legal norms) and the comparative method the paper emphasizes examples of using criminal jurisdictions within the framework of communitarian law, the delimitation of competencies between the EU and the EC, and the changes made by the Treaty of Lisbon in relation to the EU Treaty of Amsterdam. Amendments to the founding treaties have set the foundations for developing criminal jurisdictions into the supranational criminal law that through its norms would supplement national criminal justice systems in the areas of substantive criminal law and the law of criminal procedure.

show abstract

Criminal Law and Policy in the European Union

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

European criminal cooperation: Confiscation and protection of human rights in the post Brexit period

European criminal cooperation: Confiscation and protection of human rights in the post Brexit period

From Legal to Political Reasoning: National Parliaments' Use of Reasoned Opinions in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice^*

Development of criminal jurisdiction of the European Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Criminal Law and Policy in the European Union

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

European criminal cooperation: Confiscation and protection of human rights in the post Brexit period

European criminal cooperation: Confiscation and protection of human rights in the post Brexit period

From Legal to Political Reasoning: National Parliaments' Use of Reasoned Opinions in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice*

Development of criminal jurisdiction of the European Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

From Legal to Political Reasoning: National Parliaments' Use of Reasoned Opinions in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice^*