About ten years ago, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings. The Directive initially inspired high hopes, mainly because it explicitly addressed the issue of quality in interpretation and translation services. Its implementation in the EU Member States, however, has tended to be disheartening. Some even fear that current standards may be inferior to those that prevailed before the Directive was implemented. This article analyses the implementation of the Directive in Germany, Poland and Spain, and – taking the changes made to the relevant national legislation in 2013 (Germany and Poland) and 2015 (Spain) as a starting point – sheds light on early tendencies in the judicial interpretation of domestic law. It concludes that up to this day, neither Germany nor Poland nor Spain has fully complied with the Directive’s quality standards for interpretation … Read more

Data protection is one of today's most important challenges. Cross-border crime, terrorist risks, and new technologies all contribute to an increase in the collection and movement of personal data. This contribution first gives an overview of the content of the recently reformed European data protection law, i.e. the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It also provides an analysis of Directive 2016/680, which regulates the specific protection of personal data in the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences as well as the enforcement of criminal penalties. The article further outlines current projects and new developments regarding data transmission between intelligence agencies and prevention/prosecution authorities. It also focuses on the principle of limitation for the purpose of data use as well as the "compatibility" of operation purposes as rules for restricting data processing. The paper concludes by recommending the creation of harmonised and clear rules for data transmission with the … Read more

The article summarises the recent references of German criminal courts to the ECJ seeking guidance on the interpretation of the German procedure for penal orders (Strafbefehlsverfahren). Conformity was sought with regard to the EU directives on the right to interpretation/translation and the right to information. The author takes a critical position on the proposed solutions. He argues for better coherence with ECtHR case law on the person's rights and with existing, facilitated MLA procedures on the cross-border notification of judicial documents.

The European Union performs numerous tasks. In order to carry out these tasks, the Union relies on money that is provided for by the Member States, including customs duties. This article initially describes the principles of the legal framework within which Member States
- levy customs duties;
- investigate criminal offences committed in this context;
- cooperate with one another.
In particular, the article stresses that the levying of customs duties, on the one hand, and criminal prosecution, on the other, serve different purposes, for which the European Union and the national legislators have established separate legal rules. As a consequence, different regulations for administrative procedure, on the one hand, and criminal procedure, on the other, must be simultaneously observed.
The article subsequently deals with Art. 12 of Regulation (EC) No 515/97 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2015/1525 of 9 September 2015. This new provision seeks to establish that information collected as part of administrative … Read more

Judgments rendered in absentia are at the core of the ordre public discussion as has shown the “Melloni case.” The issue has high practical relevance as a possible barrier to judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The following article investigates the solutions that have been found in European extradition law. In particular, it examines whether the new Article 4a of the Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant (introduced by Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA “on trials in absentia”) indeed meets – as many critics doubt – the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECtHR’s case law on the accused’s right to be present at his/her trial. The problem has come to the fore since Germany is currently in the process of implementing the 2009 Framework Decision. The article concludes that the new provision regarding the European Union’s extradition scheme can be “brought in line” via the means of … Read more

Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties was implemented into German law in October 2010. With this instrument, it is for the first time possible to enforce financial penalties in all Member States of the European Union using a uniform procedure, provided that the Member States have adopted the necessary implementation laws. FD 2005/214/JHA is governed by the principle of mutual recognition, which became a cornerstone of cooperation both in civil and in criminal matters at the Council meeting in Tampere in 1999. In particular, the concept of list offences under Art 5 of the FD, where double criminality is not verified by the executing State, is based upon this principle.
In Germany, the Federal Office of Justice (Bundesamt für Justiz) in Bonn has been designated as the competent authority for incoming and outgoing requests under FD 2005/214/JHA. The following article gives … Read more