Avoiding conflicts of criminal jurisdiction in the European union: present and future
Автор: Sinn Arndt
Журнал: Евразийская адвокатура @eurasian-advocacy
Рубрика: Правосудие и правоохранительная деятельность в Евразийском пространстве
Статья в выпуске: 6 (7), 2013 года.
Бесплатный доступ
Purpose: Research of problems of conflicts of criminal jurisdiction in the European Union and development of legal ways on their prevention and permission. Methodology: The authors used the comparative legal method, the formal legalistic method, the method of participant observation. Results: In this paper, based on the study of a wide range of international legal instruments and scientific materials, it is substantiated that the Member States of the European Union have agreed to harmonize their criminal law, bringing about a Europeanization of national criminal law. In return, they have promised the citizens of Europe that they will live in an «area of freedom, security, and justice». It should be obvious that this area is not intended to be a first-class lounge for the ideal EU citizen. And we are still a long way from this ideal: even the question of which legal system should apply to a criminal offence that touches multiple Member States has not been adequately addressed. Instead, the EU consists of 27 areas, each representing a courtroom where a court can convict a defendant within the bounds of its own law’s criminal jurisdiction. Avoiding conflicts of criminal jurisdiction requires a European solution. The Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings missed a chance to propose a solution that does justice to the idea of a common area. In this article were analyzed the Framework Decision, highlights its weaknesses, and focuses on the actual problem: the criminal jurisdiction statutes of the member states. It proposes two new models of a possible solution that have emerged from a sweeping comparative law project initiated by the author. Novelty/originality/value: The paper has very high scientific and practical value as it contains author’s offers, generalizations and conclusions significant for avoiding conflicts of criminal jurisdiction in the European Union.
European union, comparative criminal law, comparative criminal procedural law, conflicts of criminal jurisdiction
Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/14027679
IDR: 14027679