Latest editorials All articles
The European Public Prosecutor’s Office – More Effective, Equivalent, and Independent Criminal Prosecution against Fraud?
The adoption of the regulation establishing the European Public Prosecutor's Office is a decisive step in the completion of the institutional settings for the protection of the EU’s financial interests. This article looks back at the origins of the project and recalls its underlying rationale. It further critically analyses the legislative procedure, studies the contents of the compromise reached, and provides insight into the requirements for efficient operation of the EPPO in cooperation with its partners. By way of concluding remarks, three perspectives are outlined that require further analysis and closer scrutiny, i.e.:
- Efforts in common training schemes;
- Need for criminal investigation and enforcement support;
- Reflections on the merger of the EPPO and Eurojust
The Directive on the Fight against Fraud to the Union’s Financial Interests by means of Criminal Law (PFI Directive)
Laying down the foundation for a better protection of the Union’s financial interests?
This article gives an account of the negotiations of the Commission proposal for the Directive
on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law ("PIF Directive"). It also outlines the key elements of the finally adopted legal instrument as well as its significance for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The article concludes that the comprehensive approach followed by the EU in fighting crime against the Union budget will lead to tangible results and a significantly better protection of the financial interests of the European Union.
The New Frontier of PFI Investigations
The EPPO and its Relationship with OLAF
I. Introduction On 20 November 2017, twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, Regulation 1939/2017 establishing the European Public Prosecutor’s Office – commonly referred to as the EPPO – entered into force. It is the most advanced stage in the creation of a common criminal justice area in the EU, as the EPPO is a true prosecutor’s office for conducting criminal investigations. It is – from the outset – not a coordination office, like Eurojust, and it is not an office for administrative investigations, like OLAF, but indeed a criminal investigation and prosecution office.... Read more
Editorial Guest Editorial eucrim 4/2017
Dear Readers, Efficient and proper spending of the Union’s budget is a key element in preserving the trust of EU citizens and in boosting the strength of the European project. Fraud and corruption must be fought vigorously and effectively. The ultimate goal is a high and equivalent level of protection of the EU’s budget throughout the entire territory of the EU. Important milestones that changed the institutional and legal landscape for the protection of the Union’s budget were reached in 2017. In July, the Directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law... Read more
I. Introductory Remarks Since its establishment in 1999, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has had the purpose of increasing the effectiveness of the fight against fraud and other illegal activities detrimental to the financial interests of the Union.1 It also has the double task of carrying out administrative investigations concerning fraud, corruption, and any other illegal activity affecting the EU’s financial interests and of acting as Commission service responsible for developing EU anti‑fraud policies. In its investigative function, OLAF has been operating under a legal framework that has evolved over time. OLAF conducts external investigations into areas of EU expenditure... Read more
I. Introduction: Context of the Evaluation of Regulation 883/2013 In 1999, the Commission established the European Anti-Fraud Office – OLAF – to give a deterrent answer to fraud, corruption, and other illegal activities detrimental to the financial interests of the Union.1 OLAF’s primary instrument to provide such deterrence is its ability to conduct administrative investigations in the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies (during internal investigations) and in the Member States (during external investigations).2 Initially OLAF conducted its investigations under the overarching framework of Regulations 1073/1999 and 1074/1999: the former covered the EC; the latter covered Euratom.3 After a number... Read more