Search results for “play”

This article examines the origin, foundations and main features of the proposal of the European Union to facilitate cross-border access to electronic evidence, which was presented by the European Commission in April 2018. The creation of advanced solutions for the transnational gathering of electronic evidence …

Eurojust – the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation – was first established by Council Decision 2002/187/JHA (Eurojust Decision). It is tasked primarily with the facilitation and coordination of criminal investigations and prosecutions of transnational crime in the countries that are members of the …

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is an independent body that fights against illegal activities affecting the Union’s financial interests. It carries out investigations of an administrative nature, both within the European Union and beyond its borders.
This article outlines the legal framework within which OLAF …

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is charged with protecting the EU’s financial interests by investigating fraud, corruption, and other illegal activities. OLAF’s daily work involves the processing of large amounts of sensitive1 personal data. As a service of the European Commission, OLAF is subject to Regulation (EC) 45/2001 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by Community institutions and bodies (data protection regulation) and is thus under the supervisory powers of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS). OLAF conducts administrative investigations in full independence, both internally – concerning the EU institutions and bodies –…

I. Framework Decision 2005/214 1. Introduction Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition of financial penalties (hereinafter FD 2005/214) was adopted on 24 February 2005.1 It set a deadline for Member States to comply with its provisions: 22 March 2007. As of today, 24 Member States have transposed FD 2005/214 into their respective national law.2 This instrument provides for an EU-wide execution of financial penalties on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition. FD 2005/214 has broken new ground. Before 2005, a multilateral or EU instrument for the trans-border execution of financial penalties had…

The article reflects on the trajectory of EU criminal law and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) after the Lisbon Treaty and the Stockholm Programme, in view of the upcoming “Rome Programme” (2015–2020). Herlin-Karnell identifies eight key points for the future: strengthening the …

The recently adopted Directive on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings1 (hereafter: Directive on the Presumption of Innocence)2 applies exclusively to natural persons.3 This is in contrast to previously adopted directives of the Roadmap for strengthening procedural rights in criminal proceedings4 which applied to suspected or accused persons and did not explicitly exclude legal persons.5 Therefore, one could argue that legal persons could benefit from the implementation of relevant provisions of the previously adopted directives of the Roadmap6 but that they cannot infer rights from…

I. Protecting the EU’s Financial Interests: A Shared Responsibility in a Complex Enforcement Environment The protection of the EU’s financial interests (PIF) implies a shared responsibility on the part of both the Union and the Member States. In this respect, Art. 325 para. 1 TFEU recalls the multiple levels of cooperation required to counter and combat fraud and other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union. We can identify at least three levels or dimensions of cooperation in the PIF domain: The horizontal cooperation between the EU actors holding specific PIF responsibilities; The horizontal cooperation between the competent…

I. Introduction The protection of the EU budget is a shared responsibility between the EU – namely the Commission – and the Member States.1 In principle, the national (administrative or judicial) authorities conduct investigations and sanction those violations of EU law that are detrimental to EU financial interests, both when they concern expenditure (e.g., structural funds) and revenue (e.g., customs duties). The readers of eucrim are certainly familiar with the developments in EU law that have taken place since the 1970s, which have entailed increasing EU intervention on the punitive aspects of the enforcement of EU policies. Such intervention mainly…

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 …