Organized crime legislation in the European Union. Harmonization and approximation of criminal law, national legislations and the EU framework decision on the fight against organised crime, by Francesco Calderoni

Global Crime ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-235
Author(s):  
Helena Carrapico
2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 1017-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurens van Puyenbroeck ◽  
Gert Vermeulen

A critical observer would not deny that the practice of European Union (‘EU’) policy making in the field of criminal law in the past decade since the implementation of the Tampere Programme has been mainly repressive and prosecution-oriented.1 The idea of introducing a set of common (minimum) rules, guaranteeing the rights of defence at a EU-wide level, has not been accorded the same attention as the introduction of instruments aimed at improving the effectiveness of crime-fighting. What does this mean for the future of EU criminal policy? Will the EU succeed in the coming years in developing an area where freedom, security and justice are truly balanced? According to several authors, to date the EU has evolved in the opposite direction. As one observer put it:[I]f Procedural Criminal Law arises from the application of Constitutional Law, or indeed if it may be described as “a seismograph of the constitutional system of a State”, then as a consequence the Procedural Criminal Law of the European Union shows the extent of the Democratic Rule of Law, of the existence of a true “Rechtsstaat”, within an integrated Europe. This situation may be qualified as lamentable, as the main plank of the EU's criminal justice policy relates to the simplification and the speeding up of police and judicial cooperation—articles 30 and 31 of the Treaty of the EU—but without at the same time setting an acceptable standard for fundamental rights throughout a united Europe.2


Author(s):  
Jeremy Horder

This chapter examines three major examples of financial crime: fraud, bribery, and money laundering. The importance of financial crime, and of vigorous prosecution policies in relation to it, should not be underestimated. Fraud accounts for no less than one third of all crimes captured by the Crime Survey for England and Wales. The European Union Parliament has estimated that corruption costs the EU between €179 and €990 billion each year. Finally, the Home Office estimates that the impact of money laundering on the UK economy is likely to exceed £90 billion. An understanding of these crimes, and in particular the way that they reflect corporate activity, is nowadays essential to the study of criminal law.


elni Review ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 28-28
Author(s):  
Nicola Below

The book “Environmental Crime in Europe” by the editors Andrew Farmer, Michael Faure and Grazia Maria Vagliasindi is the second edited volume of the the EU-project “European Union Action to Fight Environmental Crime" (EFFACE). The book is a follow-up to the results of the research strand of EFFACE dealing with actors, instruments and institutions involved in the fight against environmental crime and goes beyond a mere technical implementation study. The aim of this collection is to explore how environmental crime is controlled and environmental criminal law is shaped and implemented within the European Union and its Member States, from a technical and practical point of view. This article reviews the book.


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-99
Author(s):  
Enkelejda Turkeshi

Illegal waste management activities violate specific rules that aim at preventing or reducing the negative effects they may have on the environment and human health. For the purpose of providing a more effective protection of the environment, in many countries and since 2008 even at the European Union (EU) level, besides the relevant administrative offences, it is also provided for a specific criminal offence against environment concerning serious infringements of the waste management legislation. This paper examines the current legal framework in Albania concerning waste-related criminal offences, against the minimum standard set forth by the EU in the Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of environment through criminal law. While the adoption of the new framework law on Integrated Waste Management in 2011 as part of Albania’s efforts in aligning its legislation to that of the EU, has been a positive step towards more stringent rules concerning waste management, thus helping in tackling the serious and constantly evolving problems that the country has been facing in this field for years, the paper suggests that certain amendments to the Criminal Code are also necessary, as the minimum standard of the EU requires that criminal law applies at least in the case of particularly serious infringements of the new waste management legislation. These amendments would increase the protection of the environment and further the alignment of the Albanian legislation with that of the EU, while the country is seeking to fulfill obligations for EU membership.


2007 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 145
Author(s):  
Verena Murshetz

Recent developments regarding criminal matters within the European Union (EU) show a trend towards a supranational criminal competence, which could be realised before the entry into force of the European Constitution whose future is uncertain. The strongest indicators in this development are two judgments of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), one that extends the powers of the European Community (EC) over the protection of the environment through criminal sanctions  and the other applying the principle of conforming interpretation to framework decisions . This trend is questionable though, as the Treaty of the European Union (TEU) does not confer a criminal competence upon the EC. The third pillar containing criminal matters is intergovernmental in nature. This article critically discusses the recent trend and presents arguments against an implied supranational criminal law within the EU.


Author(s):  
Mihaela Agheniţei

AbstractThe confiscation of proceeds of crime has long been seen within the European Unionand beyond as an important tool in the armory of weapons to fight organized crime. Therationale for focusing on the confiscation of criminal proceeds is at least two- fold. First itaddresses concerns that enormous criminal wealth, generated most notably by various formsof trafficking offences, risks destabilizing financial systems and corrupting. As such theconfiscation of criminal assets seeks ultimately to reduce and prevent crime by making knownthat criminals will not be allowed to legitimate society. Second it attempts to undermine the“raison d'être” behind most organized crime activity, namely the maximization of profit byillicit means. As such the confiscation of criminal assets seeks ultimately to reduce andprevent crime by making known that criminals will not be allowed to enjoy their illicit wealth.By the same token, focusing on confiscation of criminal wealth can send an importantmessage by removing negative role models from local communities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-160
Author(s):  
Jantien Leenknecht ◽  
Johan Put

In criminal matters, the European Union (EU) managed to establish several mechanisms to strengthen and facilitate judicial cooperation over the years but does not clearly nor uniformly define the concepts of ‘criminal matters’, ‘criminal proceedings’, ‘criminal responsibility’ and so on in any of the cooperation instruments themselves. It is however important to know as to what the EU understands by the notion ‘criminal’ because Member States have developed specific rules in response to delinquent behaviour of minors, which are somewhat different from ‘general’ criminal law. The question arises whether the existing cooperation mechanisms only apply to ‘adult’ criminal matters or also include youth justice matters. This article therefore aims to find out whether a consistent and shared view exists on the meaning of the concept ‘criminal’ and to subsequently clarify to what extent the existing EU instruments in criminal matters also apply to juvenile offenders.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 123-139
Author(s):  
Paulina Szeląg

On January 19, 2012, the European Commission (Commission) decided to launch a visa liberalisation dialogue with Kosovo, and on June 14, 2012, it handed over to Kosovo’s government a ‘Roadmap Towards a Visa-free Regime’. This document included 95 requirements that Kosovo had to fulfil. By 2016, the Commission had adopted four reports on progress made by Kosovo in the visa dialogue. In a report issued on May 4, 2016, the EC proposed to the Council of the EU (Council) and the European Parliament (EP) to lift visa requirements on the citizens of Kosovo. The Commission stressed that by the day of the adoption of the proposal by the EP and the Council, Kosovo must have ratified the border/boundary agreement with Montenegro and strengthened its track record in the fight against organised crime and corruption. On July 18, 2018, the Commission confirmed in a report on the progress made by Kosovo in the visa dialogue, that the country had fulfilled the last two requirements included in the roadmap. The aim of this article is to analyse the visa-liberalisation dialogue between the European Union (EU) and Kosovo and whether liberalisation through a visa-free regime with Kosovo had an influence on reducing organised crime and corruption in Kosovo. The article is based on an analysis of primary and secondary sources, as well as statistical data.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document