Dear Readers, Security is among Europeans’ key concerns in 2015.1 Even though ensuring internal security lies primarily with the Member States, the new and more complex threats that have emerged require further synergies at all levels. The European Agenda on Security presented by the Commission on 28 April 2015 highlights the EU’s added value to Member States’ actions. It underlines that the EU needs a solid criminal justice response to terrorism, covering investigation and prosecution of those who plan terrorist acts or are suspected of recruitment, training, and financing of terrorism as well as incitement to commit a terrorist offence.… Read more

Since the Lisbon Treaty, the concept “Judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments” has acquired a constitutional rank. All the European institutions recognise that, in order for the principle of mutual recognition to become effective, mutual trust needs to be strengthened, and that mutual understanding between the different legal systems in the Member States will be one of the main challenges of the future. The promotion of a European legal culture among judges, prosecutors, and judicial staff is considered to be of paramount importance. Unfortunately, since the 19th… Read more

The entire European Union applies the same customs rules. Customs legislation is fully harmonised and provides for a stable and comprehensive legal system, which aims to ensure the proper and uniform application of the Union’s autonomous and international rules. It also sets out the obligations and rights of customs administrations and economic operators in a common and transparent way. Their enforcement, however, remains within the exclusive competence of its Member States. Despite differences in law enforcement structures, all EU Member States have the same responsibility to enforce EU legislation. This means that the Member States can choose the penalties that… Read more

The enforcement of EU law is traditionally based on indirect enforcement; this means that, for the achievement of policy goals, the EU relies on the institutional and procedural design in the jurisdictions of the Member States. This traditional approach has mainly been interpreted as procedural autonomy of the Member States. Those who read this procedural autonomy as a part of the national order that is reserved to the sovereignty of the nation states are on the wrong track. In fact, from the very beginning, the European Court of Justice has made clear that this procedural autonomy of the Member States… Read more

Dear Readers, When the Union prepares itself to negotiate and adopt new strategic guidelines on the basis of Art. 68 TFEU, probably already in June 2014, it could be useful to consider what the Union should do for the development of its criminal policy (provided it could be said the Union has one). Looking back on the development of the EU criminal law since the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam on 1 May 1999, some useful conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, the EU criminal law is a very recent phenomenon in the development of EU law in… Read more

Dear Readers, EU money must not be pocketed by criminals. We have a federal budget – with money coming from the 28 EU Member States – and, as a consequence, we also need federal laws to protect this budget. This is why the European Commission proposed a Directive on the protection of the EU’s financial interests in July 2012. The new EU-wide rules aim to achieve two objectives: First, to introduce common definitions of fraud throughout the EU, making sure that fraud against the EU budget is considered a crime everywhere in the EU. Second, to set a minimum level… Read more