Search results

According to an opinion by AG Rantos, national courts cannot refuse executing EAWs only because the appointment of Polish judges was unlawful. Courts must strictly follow the line established by the CJEU in LM. However, the recent judgment by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal that questioned the primacy of Union law may cast doubts on Poland's compatibility with essential fundamental rights and may justify refusals.

Civil society organisations published a compendium of scenarios that showcase situations in which the planned e-evidence Regulation would lead to serious fundamental rights harms.

On 16 December 2021, the CJEU ruled that a European arrest warrant (EAW) may be issued even if the underlying criminal proceedings have been resumed after an amnesty. The case refers to criminal proceedings before a Slovak criminal court which reexamines criminal offences committed by Slovakian security officers in the 1990es.

On 19 November 2021, Advocate General (AG) Campos Sánchez-Bordona published his opinion on pending cases before the CJEU that concern the question of whether national data retention regimes are compatible with EU law. The cases concern legislation in Germany, Ireland and France. According to the AG, the answers can already be inferred from the CJEU's recent case law. General and indiscriminate regimes for combating crimes cannot be justified.

On 21 December 2021, the CJEU (Grand Chamber) delivered its judgment on several issues of the Romanian justice reform in the area of corruption. The referring Romanian courts mainly questioned whether several decisions of the Romanian Constitutional Court are compatible with Union law. The CJEU clarified the obligations incumbent under Art. 325 TFEU and the importance of judicial independent with regard to consequences if case law of Constitutional Courts is disapplied by lower courts.

In a statement published on 10 December 2021, the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) voiced concerns over the position of the defence and procedural rights during EPPO proceedings. The CCBE identified four issues of major concern, including the lack of specific provisions on defence rights and the risks of forum shopping.

In its judgement of 21 October 2021 (Joined Cases C‑845/19 and C‑863/19 - Criminal proceedings against DR and TS), the CJEU clarified specific provisions of Directive 2014/42/EU on the freezing and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union. The CJEU …

According to the CJEU, the provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement concerning the European arrest warrant regime with respect to the United Kingdom and the provision in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom concerning the new surrender mechanism are binding on Ireland. The country cannot play its opt-in card.

The CJEU ruled on the question at which place and according to which procedures a person can exercise his/her right to be heard if the issuing authority had issued a request for additional prosecution for offences committed prior to the surrender (exception of the specialty rule).

This news item summarises the reports by the EPPO on its operational activities in October-December 2021.