On 23 May 2018, the Commission published its Proposal for a Regulation amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 883/2013 and the accompanying Staff Working Document. This brief article sets out (I) the main outcomes of the evaluation of Regulation 883/2013 completed in late 2017, (II) the objectives and scope of the Commission proposal, and (III) the main proposed changes and their rationale.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) finally delivered a judgment that puts an end to the so-called Taricco saga − at least for the time being. More importantly, this Taricco II judgment (Case C-42/17 – M.A.S. & M.B.) deals with the relationship between the principles of primacy, effectiveness, and direct effect of EU law, on the one hand, and the concept of national (and particularly constitutional) identity of the Member States, on the other. It also addresses the extent of the possibility for Member States not to apply EU law if it conflicts with an overriding principle guaranteed by their national constitution. In this context, the article aims to assess, firstly, whether the Court overruled its Melloni doctrine with this judgment. Secondly, the article analyses whether the Court, at least implicitly, answered the sensitive question of who is the ultimate judge responsible for assessing whether the “identity clause” enshrined in … Read more

Free translation from Italian into English by Francesco de Angelis and Indira Tie from an article written by Professor Sabino Cassese
With its recent decision of 20 December 2017, the European Union – the most ingenious political construction of the 20th century – reminded Poland that common values have to be respected. Since it is the first time in the history of the Union that this has ever happened, this event deserves reflection.

This article addresses several issues on the added value of the recently established European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO). One section of the article explores whether the establishment of the EPPO via enhanced cooperation undermines the added value of the EPPO in combating crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union. Another section offers an evaluation of whether the establishment of the EPPO via enhanced cooperation makes it more difficult or even impossible to further extend the competence of the EPPO over terrorism-related crimes.

This contribution aims to shed light on some issues concerning the cross-border cases (already or potentially) falling within the competence of the EPPO. The notion of “cross-border cases” – them being PIF offences or other offences – encompasses at least three scenarios:
i) Cases involving two or more Member States participating in the EPPO, including cases where the criminal activity is carried out in a single country, but the suspect has a habitual residence in, or is a national of, another Member State;
ii) Cases involving two or more Member States, one of which is not part of enhanced cooperation;
iii) Cases involving at least one third country.
In the scenarios under ii) and iii), the controversial topic is how to regulate the relations of the EPPO with the competent authorities of non-participating Member States or third countries. In contrast, the scenario under i) brings to the fore issues concerning the efficient handling … Read more