Latest editorials All articles
Guest Editorial eucrim 2-2025
22 October 2025 (updated 8 months, 2 weeks ago)Articles
Editorial for
Issue 1/2009
Editorial Guest Editorial
Dear Readers, I am delighted to contribute the editorial to this new issue of eucrim, which covers different aspects of European criminal procedural law and judicial cooperation within the European Union. Cooperation in criminal matters among the Member States tackles various questions of a different nature, spanning legal, political, theoretical, and practical issues. In contrary to the practice in civil matters, cooperation in criminal matters proves to be more difficult, mainly due to the “traditional” approach linked with the sovereignty of each State in respect of its criminal legislation. However, ideas that have been adopted and put into practice in… Read more
The Constitution says yes [but…] to the Lisbon Treaty The Judgment of the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court of the 30 June 2009
The German Federal Constitutional Court was asked to decide upon the constitutional compatibility of the changes foreseen by the Treaty of Lisbon and its implementation via various acts of legislation by the German parliamentary organs.1 Above all, the complainants (inter alia, a number of Members of the German Bundestag and the parliamentary group “DIE LINKE”) argued for constitutional breaches because, in their view, the federal government delegated powers to the EU that it was not competent to do and to such an extent as to undermine the authority of the Federal parliamentary organs (the Bundestag and the Bundesrat). The Constitutional… Read more
The Approximation of National Substantive Criminal Law on Fraud and the Limits of the Third Pillar
OLAF is the only Community body whose tasks include administrative investigations on behaviour detrimental to the financial interests of the EU that may have “criminal” and “trans-national” aspects simultaneously. Trans-national European crime requires new solutions to be found in what is commonly referred to as European criminal law. For this reason the protection of financial interests has been the motor of the emerging European criminal law and continues to play a vital role.1 Even before the existence of OLAF, its predecessor, the unit charged with the protection of the financial interests within the Commission (UCLAF), put forward first instruments on… Read more
The Protection of the euro against Counterfeiting
I. The Legal Status of the Single Currency The international law fully recognises the monetary sovereignty of the States and their exclusive competence to define their currency. This definition is binding on any person who chooses to use a specific currency, under the terms of the “lex monetae” or monetary law. The jurisprudence of the international jurisdictions (in particular, the Permanent Court of International Justice in The Hague,1 in a judgement of 12 July 1929,2 allows conclusion of the universal principle that a State is entitled to regulate its own currency. This is also reflected in recital 8 of Council… Read more
The Developments in the Case Law of the Community Courts with Regard to OLAF Investigations
I. Institutional and Legal Framework of OLAF Investigations The first cases after the establishment of OLAF confirmed and clarified its status and function and stipulated that the requirement of independence is closely related to strict observance of the Community law. In the Rothley1 case, the European courts agreed that the European Parliament Decision concerning the terms and conditions for internal investigations2 applies to objectively defined situations and has legal effects with respect to categories of persons envisaged generally and in the abstract, i.e. present or future Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), but also all the Parliament's staff members, whether… Read more
The Judgment of the Court of First Instance in the Case Franchet and Byk v European Commission
In case T-48/05, the European Court of First Instance (CFI) ruled on an application for compensation for material and non-material damage sustained as a consequence of errors alleged to have been committed by the European Commission and OLAF in investigating the “Eurostat” case. The CFI ordered the European Commission to pay Mr. Yves Franchet and Mr. Daniel Byk the sum of 56 000 Euros and ordered the Commission to pay the costs.1 The Commission decided not to appeal. Three aspects of the ruling that are highlighted in this article relate to the presumption of innocence (I below), the right of… Read more