Latest editorials All articles
Articles
Inaudito reo Proceedings, Defence Rights, and Harmonisation Goals in the EU
Responses of the European Courts and new Perspectives of EU Law
I. An Unprecedented Problem in EU Law: Inaudito reo Criminal Proceedings The right to personal participation in criminal proceedings and the problem of in absentia procedures have lain at the core of the EU legislative agenda over the last several years. Before the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA amended, inter alia, the EAW Framework Decision, tightening the conditions under which defendants can be surrendered to other Member States in proceedings instituted in the accused’s absence.1 Although this legislative intervention also contributed to the process of indirect harmonisation of criminal procedure law, initiated under the former... Read more
The Directive on the Presumption of Innocence and the Right to Be Present at Trial
Genesis and description of the new EU-Measure
I. Introduction On 9 March 2016, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Directive (EU) 2016/343 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings.1 The Directive is the fourth legislative measure that has been brought to pass since the adoption, in 2009, of the Council’s Roadmap on procedural rights for suspects and accused persons. This article describes the genesis of the Directive and provides a description of its main contents. II. Genesis of the Directive 1. Background: Roadmap and Stockholm programme In November 2009, on... Read more
The Directive on Procedural Safeguards for Children who Are Suspects or Accused Persons in Criminal Proceedings
Genesis and Descriptive Comments Relating to Selected Articles
I. Introduction On 11 May 2016, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Directive (EU) 2016/800 on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings.1 The Directive is the fifth legislative measure that has been brought to pass since the adoption of the Council’s Roadmap in 2009. This article describes the genesis of the Directive and provides descriptive comments relating to selected articles. II. Genesis of the Directive 1. Background: Roadmap In November 2009, the Council (Justice and Home Affairs) adopted the Roadmap for strengthening procedural rights of suspected or accused persons in criminal proceedings.2... Read more
Editorial for
Issue 1/2016
Editorial Editorial: 10 Years of eucrim
Dear Readers, In early 2016, eucrim celebrated its 10th anniversary. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to this endeavor over the years. Special thanks go to all our readers, authors, the Max Planck team, and the Commission. Without you, the longstanding achievements of eucrim would not have been possible! When we look back on the development of eucrim, it has been an overall success. From the very beginning, eucrim went beyond the original idea of being merely a newsletter on European criminal law. During the past ten years, it has also evolved into a well-known journal for… Read more
The “Europeanization” of Financial Supervision in the Aftermath of the Crisis
In the aftermath of the economic crisis, that began in 2007 in the U.S.A. and spread to the European economy, weakening the EU, every discussion about its causes and how to address them was linked to the absence of a suitable supervisory1 framework. The EU has been accused of lacking sufficient legal tools both at a precautionary level as well as for crisis management.2 Even though the internal market of financial services had been making progress, up until 2007 there were no truly centralized3 mechanisms and tools to supervise financial activities, identify their complexity, their risks and the interconnections between... Read more
Criminal Liability of Heads of Business
A Necessary Pillar in the Enforcement of the Protection of the Financial Interests of the EU
The 1995 Convention on the Protection of the Financial Interests of the European Communities (hereafter “PIF Convention”) already acknowledged “that businesses play an important role in the areas financed by the European Communities and that those with decision-making powers in business should not escape criminal responsibility in appropriate circumstances.”1 The PIF Convention, therefore, stipulated in Art. 3 a provision on the criminal liability of heads of business.2 Later, the Second Protocol to the PIF Convention extended criminal liability to legal persons.3 From then on, in the EU’s criminal policy, individual criminal liability of senior corporate officials for severe failures of... Read more