The EU Directive on the Right to Access to a Lawyer: A Critical Assessment

2014 ◽  
pp. 111-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena Bachmaier Winter
Keyword(s):  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals A menekültügyi őrizet elrendelésének anyagi jogi feltételei az uniós jog tükrében

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 21-31
Author(s):  
Árpád Kiss
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Asylum Seeker ◽  
Illegal Immigrants ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transit Country ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Hungary lies in the route of the stream of refugees coming from the Balkan. It is a transit country, so the refugees do not typically intend to stay here, they rather wish to travel torwards to West- and North Europe. Particular sections of Hungary's border also mean the external borders of the European Union, the area of freedom, security and justice, which has a common asylum system. Significant part of illegal immigrants presents asylum claim only to avoid the aliens procedures. From the 1st of January 2013, the legislature terminated the aliens detention against asylum applicants. From 1st of July 2013 the Hungarian legislature reintroduced the possibility of detention of applicants. The new regulation has been placed in Act LXXX of 2007 on the Right of Asylum, Sections 31/A-31/H by Act XCIII of 2013 on the Amendment of Particular Laws Concerning Law Enforcement. The introduction of asylum-seeker detention and the practice of its application have raised dust. In my essay I am introducing the connections between the reasons of ordering asylum-seeker detention in the Act on Asylum and its backgroud in the EU Directive. I am not dealing with the question of compatibility of asylum detention and human rights and with problematic procedural issues, because I consider it more important to review the substantive conditions of asylum-seeker detention and the certain practical questions of its application therefore I am focusing on this segment of jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Developments in family reunification cases before the CJEU

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 6-17
Author(s):  
Réka Friedery
Keyword(s):  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Family Reunification ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Council Directive ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Family reunification is defined by primary and secondary EU law and by the case law of the CJEU. The cornerstones are the Charter of Fundamental Rights encompasses the principle of the respect of family life and the fundamental European standards for family reunification of third-state nationals are based in the Council Directive on the Right to Family Reunification. The EU directive explicitly confirms among others that family reunification is a necessary way of making family life possible. The article analyses the way the jurisdiction of the CJEU widens the notion of family reunification and how it offers more realistic picture for the growing importance of family reunification.

scholarly journals Making Access to Government Data Work

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-83
Author(s):  
Mireille Van Eechoud
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Public Record ◽  
Government Data ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The EU Directive on Re-use of Public Sector Information of 2013 (the PSI Directive) is a key instrument for open data policies at all levels of government in Member States. It sets out a general framework for the conditions governing the right to re-use information resources held by public sector bodies. It includes provisions on non-discrimination, transparent licensing and the like. However, what the PSI Directive does not do is give businesses, civil society or citizens an actual claim to access. Access is of course a prerequisite to (re)use. It is largely a matter for individual Member States to regulate what information is in the public record. This article explores what the options for the EC are to promote alignment of rights to information and re-use policy. It also flags a number of important data protection problems that have not been given serious enough consideration, but have the potential to paralyze open data policies. 

scholarly journals The role of victims’ lawyers in criminal proceedings in the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
pp. 147737082093185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nieke A Elbers ◽  
Sonja Meijer ◽  
Iris M Becx ◽  
Arlette JJG Schijns ◽  
Arno J Akkermans
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Case File ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Sex Offences ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The role of the victim in the criminal trial process has evolved considerably in recent decades. On a European level, an important driver has been the EU Directive 2012/29/EU, according to which European countries are legally bound to afford certain rights to crime victims. In the Netherlands, the EU Directive has instigated several extensions of existing victims’ rights, and in the Code of Criminal Procedure a separate section has been devoted to the victim. The current study specifically addresses one of the victims’ rights, that is, the right to be legally represented. The Dutch government has financially invested in access to and specialization of victim lawyers in order to promote the realization of victims’ rights, specifically for victims of serious crimes and sex offences. The goal of the current study was to investigate the added value of victim lawyers and the extent to which they contribute to the fulfilment of victims’ rights in the criminal law process. A literature study was conducted to examine legislation pertaining to victims’ rights; a questionnaire study was conducted to investigate the perspective of victim lawyers ( n = 148); and interviews were conducted to examine the perspective of the police, Victim Support Netherlands, Public Prosecuting Service, and criminal courts ( n = 17). The results show that victim lawyers were important to the realization of victims’ rights. They were considered most necessary with respect to the right to claim compensation and with respect to the right to gain access to the case file. They were also required because victims’ rights have not yet been smoothly incorporated into legal practice. In addition, victim lawyers’ presence in the courtroom was considered important because it contributes to victims experiencing that they are taken seriously. It has been concluded that the support of victim lawyers is an important contribution to victim participation in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Screening in or out? Surveillance of unwanted humanity across the EU

2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 87-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen M. Hintjens
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Urban Spaces ◽  
Small Samples ◽  
Surveillance Systems ◽  
Life Chances ◽  
Local Resources ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Legitimate Target ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Routinised surveillance systems are generally regarded as public (and corporate) interference in the privacy of citizens.  Yet such comprehensive forms of surveillance intervention can be a counterpart of citizenship rights, and even of the ‘right to have rights’ within EU cities today. This paper is about selective surveillance, here termed screening out, of undocumented people and how it operates inside EU cities today.  A 2002 EU Directive on “Strengthening the Penal Framework to Prevent the Facilitation of Unauthorised Entry, Transit and Residence” underpins coercive policies designed to exclude ‘unwanted humanity’ from the realm of rights-bearing residents within EU urban spaces. Through individual narrative and a range of evidence, the article shows how selective surveillance screens out unwanted humanity from exercising their rights within EU urban spaces.  The key aim is to expose the deliberate governmental use of selective surveillance – to disable and prohibit the access of some people to local resources and urban services vital for a basic decent minimum level of life.  The logic of deterrence strategies underpin screening out and create non-persons, including failed asylum seekers who are the main focus of this article.  Without comprehensive data collection, there is little oversight possible and intervention is lacking which might improve the life chances of undocumented people who live in cities of the EU. Destitution, detention and deportation are the 3-Ds that mean the most basic social and civil rights of undocumented people are routinely neglected. Public institutions, including medical authorities, local authorities and even charities, have become points of exclusion for the unwanted.  Little is known about their health conditions or needs, with the exception of some NGO and academic studies on small samples.  Redefined across most EU cities as ‘unwanted humanity’, undocumented people and those campaigning on their behalf are increasingly a legitimate ‘target group’ for violent forms of privatised security.  Selective surveillance – or screening out - is thus a strong indicator of unwantedness, as shown with some examples from UK, Dutch and French cities.  Comprehensive surveillance could be viewed as a public good, so long as it is applied in a non-selective manner.   

The European Union and the Rights of Individuals in Criminal Proceedings

2019 ◽  
pp. 114-136
Author(s):  
Valsamis Mitsilegas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Transformative Potential ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

This chapter considers the secondary legislation that has been adopted by European Union institutions under Article 82(2) TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) in the field of procedural rights in criminal proceedings. Article 82(2) TFEU is included in the Lisbon Treaty conferring to the EU express competence to adopt minimum standards on criminal procedure. The chapter first provides an overview of the EU Directive on the right to interpretation and translation, the right to information, the right of access to a lawyer, the right to legal aid, procedural rights of children, and presumption of innocence. It then discusses some of the key challenges in reaching agreement on EU standards on procedural rights in criminal proceedings, before concluding with an analysis of the transformative potential of EU law on procedural rights when viewed within the broader constitutional and institutional context of the EU.

scholarly journals The Future Of Court Interpreting In Croatia

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-81
Author(s):  
Katja Dobrić
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Court Interpreting ◽  
The Right ◽  
Short Time ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Court interpreting in Croatia is a very unregulated field especially regarding the training and the skills that are to be acquired in order to pro- vide accurate translation at courts. One of the prerequisites according to the Regulations on Court Interpreters in Croatia is knowledge of the structure of judicial power, state government and legal terminology. Although the Regulations prescribe that the training should last no longer than two months, the organisations providing such training shorten this to three or four days. Taking into account all that has been said one realizes that in such short time a per- son cannot be properly qualified to practice as a court interpreter. According to the EU Directive on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings member states should provide adequate training in order to ensure the quality of interpretation and to avoid that suspected or accused persons complain that the quality of interpretation was not good enough to secure the fairness of the proceeding, which according to Article 2 of the Directive they have the right to. Since Croatia joined the European Union on 1 July 2013, it will have to change its Regulations on Court Interpreters in order to com- ply with this Directive. This paper will try to analyze the problems within the scope of court interpreter’s profession in Croatia both in civil and in criminal proceedings. Several examples will be suggested as the possible model for modifying court interpreting in Croatia. Since this profession is often underrated by the national courts, the paper will suggest ways to prevent such views and point out the importance of good court interpretation

scholarly journals The protection of customer personal data as an element of entrepreneurs’ ethical conduct

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 27-44
Author(s):  
Ewa Kulesza
Keyword(s):  
Data Protection ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Business Practices ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The right to the protection of personal data, which is part of the right to privacy, is a fundamental human right. Thus, its guarantees were included in the high-level regulations of the European Union as well as the legal norms of the EU Member States. The first Polish law regulating the protection of personal data was adopted in 1997 as the implementation of EU Directive 95/46. The law imposed a number of obligations on public and private entities which process personal data in order to protect the rights of data subjects and, in particular, to guarantee them the ability to control the correctness of processing of their personal data. Therefore, the law obliged data controllers to process data only on the basis of the premises indicated in the legislation, to adequately secure data, and to comply with the disclosure obligation concerning data subjects, including their right to correct false or outdated data or to request removal of data processed in violation of the law. However, as complaints directed by citizens to the supervisory body—the Inspector General for Personal Data Protection—showed, personal data controllers, especially those operating in the private sector, did not comply with the law, acting in a manner that violated their customers’ rights. In the hitherto existing unfair business practices of entrepreneurs, the violations of the data protection provisions that were the most burdensome for customers were related to preventing them from exercising their rights, including the right to control the processing of data, as well as the failure to provide the controller’s business address, which made it impossible for subjects whose data were used in violation of the law or for the inspecting authorities to contact the company, a lack of data security and a failure to follow the procedures required by law, the failure to secure documents containing personal data or their abandonment, a lack of updating customer data, the use of unverified data sets and sending marketing offers to deceased people or incorrect target recipients, and excessive amounts of data requested by controllers. The violations of the rights of data subjects recorded in Poland and other EU Member States—among other arguments—provided inspiration for the preparation of a new legal act in the form of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (which entered into force on 25 May 2018). The extension of the rights of people whose data are processed was combined in the GDPR with the introduction of new legal instruments disciplining data controllers. Instruments in the form of administrative fines and the strongly emphasised possibility to demand compensation for a violation of the right to data protection were directed in particular against economic entities violating the law.

scholarly journals Legal aspects of usage out-of-commerce works by libraries and other institutions

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Valentyna Trotska
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Digital Environment ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
European Legislation ◽  
Collective Management ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Keywords: copyright; out-of-commerce works; cultural heritage institutions; exceptionsand limitation; representative organizations of collective management The article is devoted to the study of the norms of Directive2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright and relatedrights in the Digital Single Market, such as provisions on the permitted use of worksout-of-commercial circulation, that are permanently in the collections of libraries andothers cultural heritage institutions. The norms of this EU Directive, as well as theprovisions defined in the laws of some European countries, are analyzed in detail.The main provisions of the EU Directive are considered, which provide for a doublemechanism of permitted use of works of cultural heritage institutions: main and reserve.The essence of each mechanism is considered in detail.The article also considers the question of when the rights holders have the right torefuse, meaning not to allow cultural heritage institutions to use out-of-commerce works.A comparison is made between the norms of the legislation of Ukraine on copyrightand related rights concerning the free use of works by libraries and other culturalheritage institutions and the relevant norms of European legislation. It is establishedthat in the legislation of Ukraine the list of institutions that have the right tofreely reproduce works is limited only to libraries and archives. Unlike the provisionsof the EU Directive, norms of national legislation do not apply to museums, film andaudio funds. However, free reproduction is allowed only by reprographic method (photocopying)of copies, which restrains the possibility of freeing reproduction (digitization)of works using modern digital technologies.It is concluded that classical norms of the legislation on copyright and relatedrights with the development of relations in the digital environment are changing.Legislators are constantly searching for optimal ways to balance public and privateinterests. Whether the new rules will be successful depends on how states implementthe rules of the EU Directive in state law and how they will be applied in practice.

Prawo do swobodnego przemieszczania się w przypadkach bezdomności migrantów wewnątrzunijnych

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 157-170
Author(s):  
Magdalena Mostowska
Keyword(s):  
Public Space ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Voluntary Organizations ◽  
European Law ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The article examines interpretations of freedom of movement and access to social assistance within the EU Directive 2004/38. Examples of EU migrants’ homelessness are shown to demonstrate the confusing circularity in the regulations. The paper goes on to the development of local governments’ and voluntary organizations’ practice of limiting support to EU migrants in homelessness. Narrower interpretations of the right to reside are a basis for refusing access to benefits or even shelter. Repressive public space practices lead sometimes even to deportations. These interpretations, practices and public discourse are shown on the examples of the Netherlands, the UK and Sweden. Interpretations of the European law, practices and public debate are tools that limit exercising the right to free movement by socially defining and categorising homeless EU migrants as persons whose rights are dependent on their position on the labour market.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document