In February 2024, following Germany’s “Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz”, the European Union’s Digital Services Act, and the United Kingdom’s Online Safety Act, Canada exploited its “second mover” regulatory status by introducing its long-awaited Bill C-63. Through its Online Harms Act and related amendments, it proposed an innovative “systems-based risk assessment” model for regulating harmful online content. In this article, the authors argue that any truly “systems-based” approach will benefit from regulatory insights and prescriptions informed by the following two interdisciplinary sources. First, both constitutional and media law scholars endorse stepping outside conventional regulatory models by employing more “context-based” or holistic approaches—a regulatory turn seemingly consistent with Canada’s pivot towards an innovative “systems-based” model. Second, exploring further the synergies between law and medicine introduced in our previous Digital Iatrogenesis eucrim article, any enhanced framework aimed at “cracking the code” of digital media regulation will benefit from profound insights native to social medicine and diagnostic … Read more

In June 2023, the European Chief Prosecutor described the level of effectiveness of criminal investigations falling within the scope of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in the Czech Republic as low. This article aims to determine whether any data can verify or refute this statement. Incorporating relevant data from the EPPO’s annual reports and statistics from national law enforcement authorities, the author shows that the effectiveness of the investigations does not differ dramatically from that of other economic crimes in the Czech Republic. On the contrary, the majority of cases investigated by the EPPO generally record a higher clearance rate than the national average. The clearance rate of EPPO cases even further improved in 2023 as statistical data submit.

This article discusses the European Commission’s role in preventing and fighting corruption by means of its annual Rule of Law Report. The authors present the anti-corruption pillar of the Report, in which the EU Member States’ frameworks in preventing and fighting corruption are regularly assessed, and which outlines the Commission’s recommendations to all Member States in this area. In addition, the article describes broader synergies that exist in conjunction with other policy initiatives and tools, such as the new EU network against corruption, the Conditionality Regulation, and the Recovery and Resilience Plans.

This article is linked with the article by Iwona Jaskolska that introduced the new instruments protecting the cohesion budget against rule-of-law breaches (→ related link). It outlines the practical implementation of the two complementary but independent legal procedures: the Conditionality Regulation and the horizontal enabling conditions under the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR). They have been applied so far in relation to two EU Member States: Hungary and Poland.
The first part of the article analyses the Commission’s rule-of-law assessment of both countries and the Council’s follow-up with respect to Hungary within the framework of the Conditionality Regulation mechanism. The second part looks at the important restrictions on possible requests for reimbursement under the 2021-2027 cohesion policy programmes that were imposed in parallel against Poland and Hungary in accordance with the CPR horizontal enabling conditions on the implementation of the Charter on Fundamental Human Rights.

This article introduces the main legal instruments at the EU level to protect the EU’s financial interests with a special focus on the budget for cohesion measures. It features the Regulation on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (Conditionality Regulation) against breaches of the principles of the rule of law, and the cohesion policy common provisions Regulation which provides horizontal enabling conditions applicable to all its financing objectives (CPR).

The first preliminary ruling request concerning the EPPO Regulation prompted the European Court of Justice to interpret the provisions of Article 31 regarding cross-border investigations. In its judgment of 21 December 2023, the Court largely, but not fully, followed the considerations and the proposed response offered by Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta. The judgment is remarkable in the sense that it is largely inspired by considerations concerning the objectives of the Regulation – in spite of the fact that the interpretation given by the Court is difficult to reconcile with the wording of the interpreted provisions and its legislative history. Article 31 certainly has its deficiencies and could have been worded more clearly. Indeed, the Court’s judgment may help to ensure efficient cross-border investigations by the EPPO. Nevertheless, the EU legislator is now called upon to review and amend the provisions of the EPPO Regulation to clarify its intentions. Furthermore, the … Read more