EU Law-Making Process in Criminal Matters After Lisbon. In Search of a Better EU Criminal Policy

2021 ◽  
pp. 63-83
Author(s):  
Noelia Corral-Maraver
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Law Making

scholarly journals Purposes and Functions of Public Punishment in Roman Law in the Perspective of Justinian's Codification

2019 ◽  
pp. 21-37
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Amielańczyk
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Discretionary Power ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Aulus Gellius ◽  
Seneca The Younger ◽  
Criminal Matters

The objectives and functions of the punishment for a public offence (crimen) had already been discussed by M. Tullius Cicero, Seneca the Younger, or Aulus Gellius many centuries before Emperor Justinian. According to their statements, the Romans distinguished in principle all the types of punitive functions known today: deterrence (special and general prevention), reprisal (retaliation), elimination (protection of society against the perpetrator), and even the rehabilitation (educative) function. The emergence of the imperial judiciary extra ordinem in criminal matters could have been conducive to performance of various functions assigned to various penalties, along with the possibilities offered by the discretionary power of judicial decisions. However, when reading Emperor Justinian’s Constitutio Tanta and the numerous accounts from the Roman jurists included in his codification, contained in Book 48 of the Digest, one may be convinced that the function of paramount importance for the emperor was to deter potential perpetrators by means of severe penalties, including notably the death penalty. The educational function was rather marginal. The primary objective of the imperial criminal policy was the ruthlessly severe punishing for criminal offences (severitas, atrocitas) and the implementation of the postulate of inevitability of criminal responsibility.

4. EU Law: Sources, Forms, and Law-Making

2021 ◽  
pp. 94-140
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Alternative Decision ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Eu

This chapter takes an overall view of the EU legal order and examines its legal system, including the elements which are either different from or similar to member states’ legal systems. It begins by taking an overall view of the EU legal order, the different forms of EU law, and the various sources of law contributing to this legal order, in particular now the rich source of human and fundamental rights in the EU legal order. It considers the non-strictly legally binding rules known as ‘soft law’. It also looks at the ways or processes by which the binding laws are made and reviews alternative decision-making and law-making developments.

scholarly journals Linked Open Data and e-Participation in the EU Law-Making Process

2016 ◽  
pp. 79-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Schmitz ◽  
E. Francesconi ◽  
B. Batouche ◽  
B. Dombrovschi ◽  
D. Duy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Data ◽  
Linked Open Data ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals A legitimacy-based approach to EU criminal law: Maybe we are getting there, after all

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-39
Author(s):  
Kimmo Nuotio
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Strong Emphasis ◽  
European Criminal Law ◽  
The Eu

European Union (EU) law is known for its strong emphasis on effectivity and more generally for its instrumental character. This is not foreign even to European criminal law, a feature which creates some tension between the EU criminal law and criminal law in the national setting. EU Framework Decisions and Directives often require the Member States to criminalize certain forms of conduct with sanctions that are ‘Effective, Dissuasive and Proportionate’. In this article, I try to show that it would be timely to look at EU criminal law from an alternative point of view, as a more mature law. I call this a legitimacy-based approach. Such a reading would ease some of these tensions. It would also be helpful in developing a criminal policy for the EU, a policy which would be realistic and pragmatic. And it would be easier to look at EU criminal law from the point of view of justice. In order to get there, we need to see where the (current) narrow deterrence argument gets is wrong or one-sided. Some social theory is needed in order to make the point.

‘Mr Smith Goes To Brussels’: Third Country Lobbying and the Making of EU Law and Policy

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 45-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia KORKEA-AHO
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Legislative Activities ◽  
Law Making

AbstractThe EU’s openness towards stakeholders is central to the legitimacy of its law-making. With the rapid globalisation of EU legislative activities, openness towards actors from third countries requires analysis. With reference to the notion of ‘lobbying’, this article outlines a framework for identifying the role of third country actors in EU policy processes. The two arguments brought forward suggest that third country lobbying is facilitated by the openness of Union law- and policy-making, and that third country actors contribute to EU decision-making at all stages. The article concludes with a set of questions that third country lobbying raises concerning the EU’s legitimate law-making authority in Europe and beyond.

Europäisches Strafrecht nach dem Vertrag von Lissabon: Macht die Reform den Weg frei?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grazyna Marina Plump
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Democratic Deficit ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Vertrag Von Lissabon ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
European Criminal Law ◽  
The Eu

This study deals with a topic that has been matter of debate among the academic community for some time: The competences of the EU in Criminal Law. With the current EU law after Lisbon the basic academic criticism of European Criminal Law, especially the prominent objection of a democratic deficit, is being scrutinized. Thereafter the analysis deals with the EU’s legislative powers in criminal matters. The competences with regard to the harmonization of Criminal Law are examined as well as the EU’s legislative power to define offences via regulations. The work relates the analysis of the current legal basis of European Criminal Law to the fundamental criticism that is voiced especially from the point of view of democratic theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document