European integration in the field of security and criminal law has been largely based on the establishment of mechanisms of inter-state cooperation. Inter-state cooperation has both an internal and an external dimension. The internal dimension consists of the establishment of mechanisms of inter-state co-operation via the application of the principle of mutual recog-nition in the field of criminal law, ensuring that cooperation takes place on the basis of limited formality, automaticity, and speed. The external dimension consists of the establishment of cooperation mechanisms, most notably at the level of trans-atlantic counter-terrorism cooperation, ensuring the transfer of a wide range of personal data from the European Union to the United States. At both levels of cooperation, mutual trust is central. Cooperation mechanisms are based on mutual trust based on presumptions of compliance of the parties with co-operation arrangements on fundamental rights. However, this model of cooperation based on presumed trust is … Read more

It is certainly true that the juridical system on the protection of human rights in Europe is rather complex. This is for two main reasons; firstly, the Charter serves as a clear legal basis for the CJEU to rule on fundamental rights issues and, second-ly, the EU’s intensive legislative activity in criminal matters has produced a great amount of cases that most often impinge upon sensitive human rights issues. This has necessarily re-sulted in the CJEU dwelling on what has so far been an ex-clusive domain of the ECtHR and national courts. Against this background, the current article highlights issues with respect to the sharing of competence over fundamental rights by the two courts.

I. Preliminary Remarks Of the most significant innovations of the Treaty of Lisbon, one must refer to the conferral to the EU of a competence in criminal matters,1 according to which the national legislator, in some cases, is under the obligation to adopt criminal provisions implementing measures regulating criminalization decided at the supranational level. Indeed, according to Art. 83 TFEU, the EU legislative bodies – European Parliament and Council in co-decision − “establish, by means of directives adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions.” Such a competence is conferred... Read more

The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009 resulted in a number of important changes for the democratic accountability of European criminal law. Among them is the enhanced role of the European Parliament as regards the adoption of EU legislation in this area. This coincides with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU Charter) achieving binding status.1 A new European Parliament was installed in July 2014, followed by the confirmation of the Commission presided over by Jean-Claude Juncker. Together with the Council, these European institutions now have the obligation to make a convincing... Read more

I. Introduction: The EU framework on victims’ rights Unlike other initiatives seeking to consolidate the area of “freedom, security and justice,” it would be justified to consider the EU action on victims’ rights as a clear success story. Improving the rights, support, protection, and participation of victims in criminal proceedings, alongside capturing and punishing the offenders, has been a focus of Union policy during the past few years, especially since the need for action in this field had been identified as a strategic priority by the Commission in the Action Plan implementing the Stockholm Programme of the European Council.1 The... Read more