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 Umocnienie praw jednostki w postępowaniu karnym w Unii Europejskiej a dyrektywa w sprawie dostępu do adwokata

2014 ◽  
pp. 11-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anastazja Gajda
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

The paper deals with the new Directive on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings in EU. The Directive aims at straightening of the rights of suspects (defendants) as a result of introduction of minimal standards (article 82 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). The Directive asserts the right of a suspect on the whole territory of the EU to remain in contact with his/her attorney from the moment of arrest until the end of criminal proceedings. The paper presents genesis of the Directive, the legislative process and analyses contents of the Directive.

scholarly journals Preparation of a Legislative Proposal in the Multilingual Legal System of the European Union

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
Anna Doliwa-Klepacka
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Language Version ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legislative Proposal ◽  
Official Languages ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The principle of multilingualism in the legal system of the European Union is one of the key elements that guarantees, among others, the right of access to EU legislation. It is particularly important not only in the sphere of the direct application of the EU law, but also in the sphere of access to information during the lawmaking procedures at the EU institutions. A special case is, however, a stage of preparing a draft legislative proposal by the European Commission. The EU member states agree to limit the use of official language version to the working documents for “working” languages of the Commission, i.e. English, French and German. In practice, English and French are the most widely used languages for the working arrangements in the preparation of the draft legislation, mainly due to costs of the necessary translations and an effectiveness of this stage. This article presents a course of the stage of the drafting a legislative proposal by the Commission and illustrates the scope of work partly exempted from the obligation to ensure the full application of the principle of equivalence of all the official languages of the European Union.

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.

Article 7 of the Directive 2012/13/EU on the Right to Information in Criminal Proceedings: A Missed Opportunity to Ensure Equality of Arms in Pre-Trial Proceedings?

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Pivaty ◽  
Anneli Soo
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Member States ◽  
Early Access ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Missed Opportunity ◽  
The Eu

This article critically examines the EU law provisions on the right of access to the materials of the case in pre-trial criminal proceedings (Article 7 of Directive 2012/13/EU). It argues that they are insufficient to ensure adequate protection of this right in Member States. Furthermore, the approach chosen by EU legislator did not properly implement the European principle of the equality of arms in pre-trial proceedings. It is submitted that a clearer standard is needed to ensure an appropriate balance between the interests of adequate protection of individual rights and of protecting safety and security. It is suggested that although some room for national interpretation is desirable, the right of early access to the case materials should be endorsed by all Member States with derogations applied sparingly and under specific circumstances. Here further guidelines from the cjeu play significant role in order to ensure equality of arms in pre-trial proceedings.

Access to and Limits on Evidence Dossiers in Civil Law Systems

2019 ◽  
pp. 561-585
Author(s):  
Michele Caianiello
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

This chapter examines issues surrounding the right of access to and limits on evidence dossiers in civil law systems. It first provides an overview of the general aims pursued by the law in regulating the parties’ right of access to the investigative file before discussing supranational sources, such as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the European Court on Human Rights (ECtHR). In particular, it explores how the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and certain directives adopted by the European Union on the right to information by defendants and by victims has influenced the criminal procedures of EU Member States. It also analyzes disclosure at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and concludes by explaining how civil law systems have changed in recent years, what their common features and shortcomings are, and how they could be improved.

scholarly journals Access to a Lawyer for a Suspect at Early Stage of Criminal Proceedings and Its Participation in Investigative Acts

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-127
Author(s):  
Joanna Dzierżanowska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Polish Code ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Union Directive

This elaboration is dedicated to analysis of access to a lawyer for a suspect at early stage of criminal proceedings in Polish criminal law in the light of directive 2013/48/EU. In particular, it emphasises the suspects right of access to  a lawyer during identity parade, confrontation and reconstruction of the scene of a crime. It considers whether the applicable legal provisions of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure ensure, above all, appropriate scope of the right of the defence for the suspected person in view of the indicated evidentiary activities and whether this scope corresponds to the standards designated by the European Union directive 2013/48/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 Strengthening the protection of the right to remain silent at the investigative stage: What role for the EU legislator?

2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442110283
Author(s):  
Anna Pivaty ◽  
Ashlee Beazley ◽  
Yvonne M Daly ◽  
Dorris de Vocht ◽  
Peggy ter Vrugt
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
The Eu

This article reflects on the possible contribution of the European Union towards safeguarding the right to silence at the investigative stage of criminal proceedings in EU Member States. The analysis is not limited to the Directive 2016/343/EU and other procedural rights’ Directives. Rather, it focuses on the role of the EU as a legal and political player, pursuing the goal of enhanced protection of procedural rights in criminal proceedings. The article first examines compliance of the legal provisions of the four examined jurisdictions with the Directive. It then identifies the relevant areas, not addressed or insufficiently addressed in the existing EU instruments, which appear problematic as far as the effectuation of the right to silence is concerned. The article argues that a more detailed binding EU regulation is not an appropriate solution to address the existing problems. Instead, it suggests that the EU legislator should consider other, more indirect means of action.

scholarly journals Access to a Lawyer in Proceedings for Minor Offences Under Polish and European Union Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-196
Author(s):  
Iwona Magdalena Bień-Węgłowska
Keyword(s):  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Legal Counsel ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
The Eu

The Article deals with the opportunity for a suspected person and the passive party in the proceedings for offences to exercise the right of access to a lawyer and the right of legal counsel. The aim of the article is to provide a comparative legal analysis of the provisions of the Code of Procedure in Minor Offences against the background of the EU guarantees under Directives 2013/48/EU and 2016/1919/EU. Directive 2013/48/EU deals with one of the two aspects of the aforementioned right: namely the right of access to a lawyer for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings, while the right to legal aid and to state-guaranteed legal assistance in certain circumstances is regulated by Directive 2016/1919/EU.

scholarly journals TOWARDS MINIMUM PROCEDURAL GUARANTEES FOR THE DEFENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE EU

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 1017-1038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurens van Puyenbroeck ◽  
Gert Vermeulen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Democratic Rule ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
The Eu

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document