Latest editorials All articles


Articles

Articles found: 406 of 406
 Jean-Pierre Pétillon Jean-Pierre Pétillon

Réussites et Défis de l’Office Européen de Lutte Antifraude

1 January 2008 // french

The article addresses the successes and deficiencies of OLAF. The European Commission created OLAF in 1999. In ten years, the Office was able to establish itself as a truly independent investigation service at the disposal of the European Institutions and the Member States with the objective of protecting the financial interests of the European Union. The challenge of creating an efficient, independent investigation service was taken up. At every moment, it has been a fight which has to continue in the future by improving the functioning of the Office and by unceasingly adapting it to the new realities of the European integration.

Read more

Editorial Editorial first eucrim issue 1-2/2006 From Agon to eucrim

15 September 2006 // english

I. Developing new visions and models for the cooperation and integration of the national European criminal law systems in the supra-national European context is one of the most challenging tasks for criminal lawyers in the 21st century. This new challenge is caused by the fact that European integration not only fosters the coalescence of European citizens and economies, but also an increase in trans-national crime. In a close economic community, it is no longer possible to deal with such phenomena of trans-national crime using traditional national criminal law systems, based on judicial decisions which are principally limited to national territory… Read more

Dr. Marianne Wade Dr. Marianne Wade

OLAF and the Push and Pull Factors of a European Criminal Justice System

1 January 2006 // english

I. Introduction When the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) was created in 1999, it was in a context of determination that criminal behaviour to the detriment of the financial interests of the European Communities should face decisive reaction, but the focus was upon the creation of a body which was conclusively administrative in nature.1 Although the need to address behaviour viewed as harmful and to prevent such behaviour in the future was strongly outlined, the methods chosen to achieve this were explicitly of this regulatory nature. One was not, however, blind to the nature of the territory to which OLAF’s work… Read more