Samenvatting
Samenvatting - European Criminal Law (3011ALFIVY)
ECL summary including textbook, lectures, tutorials and case law
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 34 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 34 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Week 1Intergovernmentalism: arrangements whereby nations cooperate vs. supranationalism: MS
surrender power in specific areas to the higher organization.
Background
• Should not have existed (it was a no go zone for supranational parties to influence the
sovereignty of MS). It is based on economic integrations, to ensure the EU Freedoms (ex.
Freedom of movement: an unexpected spill-over → ECL developed). Grown (also the
things of which the EU has power) primarily through the treaties, the driver: economic
integration, internal market & ever closing union. But it is not clear where it stops!
• Case Greek Maize: The European Economic community was meant to get tax from
Greece because they imported maize from Joegoslavia. Greece acted as though it was
their own maize = Tax fraud. Greece: it is a national problem, we will investigate it. Since
there was no EU measure to punish Greece. The principle of sincere cooperation was
used to punish Greece as though they frauded their own budget (since now they have
frauded the EU Community budget) → they cannot just neglect their responsibilities →
Start of EU criminal law (if the budget is not taken seriously, we will push further)
• Why is criminal law important in enforcement of economic freedoms?
o Positive integration: EU expect MS to adopt legislation to make sure that those
freedoms are not compromised
o Negative integration: Economic integration is not possible if certain measures are
not adjusted. CL measures can be important to ensure those freedoms.
• European council: general political direction and priorities vs. Council of the European
Union: negotiating and adopting EU legislation vs. Council of Europe: international
organization in Strasbourg protecting human rights. European criminal law is about the
EU, but the Council of Europe’s ECHR influences the CJEU → this distinction is
important
History through treaties
• ECSC, EEC
• TREVI (terrorism) + Schengen: borders where removed for the freedom of movement,
criminals could also move freely → cooperation was needed! + CISA
o Those treaties where not about the economic community, but an expansion of it.
o This meant compensatory measures (like cooperation for security and police)
where needed → Impuls for ECL!
• Maastricht: greater cooperation between MS through economic, and legal channels
, o Pillar 1: cooperation/integration was pursued through the supranational level
o Pillar 2: intergovernmental: MS are in control when defining positions
o Pillar 3: Justice and home affairs (also intergovernmental)
o Pillar 2 and 3: MS had sovereignty and did not want to give this power to the
supranational level → Unanimous voting was needed, which meant the MS had
full control and EU institutions had very little influence
o Joint actions + Conventions: on Europol and PFI.
• Amsterdam: boost of explicit competences for the EU
o Speeding up the integration
o Things from pillar 3 were incorporated in pillar 1 (asylum, visa, judicial
cooperation civil law) → Pillar 3 thinned out and pillar 1 became bigger
o Criminal law cooperation stayed in pillar 3 and MS wanted to keep this power. For
the MS it was not about Freedom and Justice, but more about Security (to ensure
the ability to put away the bad guys without having to respect all the procedural
safeguards). But MS where keener on serious cross-border crimes.
o FD instead of joint actions resulting in approximation in areas of Freedom
Security and Justice (P3)
▪ Harmonisation/approximation is about bringing systems together: similar
systems but fall short of unification (where there is one system that is
completely unified). Harmonisation/approximation is about making
domestic systems of MS look more or less the same → will never amount
to complete unification.
▪ Approximation relates to defying FD = P3 instrument vs. harmonisation
relates to previous matters = P1 instrument
▪ Mutual recognition: gives more room for differences among MS,
presumes that other MS systems complies with certain aspects as fair
trials = based on mutual trust (is only possible if the systems are alike), it
presumes that differences can be neglected.
• Treaty of Nice
o Not much changes
• Constitution of Europe
o Failed referenda
• Lisbon Treaty
o Major constitutional shift: pillar structure abolished
o EU succeeds EC (TFEU, TEU) → CL cooperation (art. 82 TFEU e.v.)
o CJEU has full jurisdiction on all matters, even ex-p3
, oDirectives are the main form of cooperation
oECFR is primary EU law and binding for all MS (victory for fundamental rights)
oEU has a broad supranational CL competence
▪ 82, 83 TFEU
▪ Ordinary legislative procedure (EP + Council), but MS have an emergency
brake if the MS feels that ‘fundamental aspects of its criminal justice are
affected’
➔ Mission creep: more and more competences to the EU
EU Main institutions
Criminal law
• What is criminal law is based on type of charge, nature of offence & harshness of penalty
→ administrative law can also act as criminal law, it needs to be compared to classic
criminal law. Competition law can also act as criminal law, because it is punitive, not
restorative and there are fines included.
• Klip’s description: the multi-level field of law in which the EU has normative influence on
substantive criminal law and/or criminal procedure and.or on co-operation between the
MS, supplemented by the areas where EU directly enforces criminal law.
• Sergey’s description: A system of EU legal standards, instruments & policies promoting
security, rights protection and integration among its MS by providing them with the
common legal basis for criminalisation, effective cooperation in criminal matters, and
direct enforcement of EU law in certain areas.
• ECL aspects:
o Constitutional: competences, sources, MS obligations to implement and enforce
application and interpretation of CL
o Substantive: eurocrimes and other crimes subject to harmonization (definition,
maximum and minimum Penalties)
o Procedural: fundamental rights, instruments & cooperation
, o Institutional: EU bodies facilitating cooperation or enforcing ECL: a system of EU
legal standards, instruments & policies promoting security
Managerial law?
• EU attempt to manage the MS domestic CL. ECL is not CL on its own, it tells MS how to
adapt their domestic CL and gives minimal standards. The EU proceeds the
Europeanization, it is a super upgraded form (on steroids) of TCL: there are measures
possible in ECL (unlike TCL).
➔ MS can be dragged by the CJEU and sanctioned (in practice: get another deadline from
the European Commission) but it is embarrassing
o Hybrid: co-existing of CL and EU law
o Multi-layered:
Supranational and intergovernmental + domestic
Europeanisation of criminal law of MS (minimumstandards)
Enforcement: mainly domestic
o Multi-polar: Eu legislator as well as domestic legislators (who implement the EU
law in domestic law) → there are many actors who play a role
o Patchwork system: there are many instruments, there is no one criminal code,
there is no European Criminal court, domestic courts play that role. CJEU merely
checks if the law was correctly applied by the MS and EU institutions (more like
an arbiter
Week 2
Constitutional principles
• ECL is a product of EU integration → much more than an economic organization
• Primary instruments: treaties, not only horizontal aspects: high degree integration
(fundamental rights, own currency) → like a superstate!
• Case Van Gend en Loos: EU community law has direct effect in the domestic laws of MS
(whether the States have a dualist or monist system does not matter). Conditions: rules
must be sufficiently clear, precise, unconditional. Domestic courts are frontline
judicators
• Case Costa/Enel: MS when creating the EU communities, they delegated certain
sovereign powers to the community. They sought to create a community with its own
legal order, instruments, capacity in law, specific powers. The treaty is the primary
source: it has supremacy! Including constitutional legislation = big deal (place
community law above domestic laws
• Not standard IL, but supranational law (except pillar 3). After Maatsricht: vague whether
p3 would also benefit from community supremacy (because MS kept their power but P3
was very thin). Post Lisbon: all EU law would be benefiting from supremacy/primacy
• 2 TEU: Union was founded on the values → ethical norms or legal values?, 3 TEU:
Freedom of security and justice used to be p1 and p3, it is now the main aspect of EU
law. 67 TFEU
• Distinguish competences
o Exclusive competence EU: regulation of customs, competitions rules internal
market, conservation MBR
o Shared competence EU/MS: internal market, social policy, environment
o Supporting MS (+ EU): protection of human health, culture, tourism, education
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper taranovakovic. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €10,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 72841 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen