Trends in illegal wildlife trade across the EU between 2015 and 2020

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-170
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Plant Species ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Wildlife Trade ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Eu

This paper deals with threats posed to biodiversity and human health by illegal trafficking of animals, plants, and related natural products. This activity contributes even to climate change. Altogether, these activities compromise environmental sustainability, therefore, urgent action is needed. For over one-decade, international communities, and organizations (UNODC, Interpol, Europol, and EU) have been warning on these wildlife crimes. We examine seizure data on illegal imports into and out of the European Union (EU) of illegal animal and plant species, protected by the international CITES Convention. Trends of these imports are evaluated over a five-year interval. This activity is global and poses serious threats, so its knowledge is of paramount importance to researchers, law enforcement agencies, and judicial authorities. In the meanwhile, the illegal smuggling offers undeserved benefits to criminals, and they may become a new form of organized crime. In our quantitative research, we collected data from the wildlifetradeportal.com database. The database was searched for the 27 Member States of the EU, and the time interval from January 1, 2015 to October 10, 2020 was selected. We grouped and systematized obtained data by countries and based on individual seizures, we found the method of illegal shipment (by road, air, or sea). In addition, we identified the object of the smuggled goods (animal or plant species), the quantity, which was smuggled. We screened the source countries of exports to the EU and the destination countries of imports.After systematizing collected data, as described here, we established that for each species the same target and source country occur recurrently (over ten times), i.e., older and newer trends can be observed, and seized quantities are also significant. Our findings offer further research directions, analysis opportunities, and new challenges for law enforcement agencies. Based on our results, one can state that this topic deserves priority treatment, and that effective action can only be envisaged via cooperation between individual EU Member States, as well as EU States and third countries

INTRODUCTION OF HIGHLY MORAL ASPECTS OF THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE NATIONAL SYSTEM OF INFLUENCE OF SOCIETY ON ACTIVITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilya Kiva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Member States ◽  
Equal Distribution ◽  
National System

The article considers the peculiarities of the introduction of high moral aspects of the political and social system of the European Union in the national system of public influence on the activities of law enforcement agencies. It is established that the implementation of legislative norms and provisions of the European Union in the legal system of Ukraine is the basis of the European course and further effective application of the principles of state regulation of law enforcement. It is substantiated that the activity of the police is subject to clear regulation both in the member states of the European Union and in Ukraine. Therefore, the organizational and legal support of public authorities in determining the procedure for recruitment, dismissal, receiving incentives for professional tasks corresponds to the principles of civil society. The public and its influence on law enforcement are correlated with law-centrism. It is noted that the influence of the community on the activities of law enforcement agencies is identified with respect for legal norms and regulatory framework. It is emphasized that decentralization, which is being introduced in the member states of the European Union, aims at equal distribution of powers between police bodies and, as a consequence, improvement of public law enforcement communication. In Ukraine, on the other hand, there are similar transformations in the legal framework of civil society cooperation with the police: the idea of decentralization corresponds to the Euro-Atlantic course, which is the guiding one, in the context of shaping state policy for Ukraine. It is pointed out that the process of perception by the police and structural units of law enforcement agencies of the European Union member states of the influence of civil society on the style of their functioning is a process of democratization of the socio-political system.

scholarly journals Law Enforcement Cooperation of the Member States of the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 338-342
Author(s):  
Natalia Mushak ◽  
Anastasiia Zaporozhets
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
External Action ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Internal Security ◽  
Main Instrument ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the study of law enforcement cooperation of the European Union Member States. The main bodiesresponsible for cooperation in the EU have been identified.It has been determined that the main instrument of police cooperation is the European Police Office, which is a central elementof the wider European internal security architecture. CEPOL has been proven to be the agency that develops, implements and coordinatestraining for law enforcement officers. The EU Analytical Intelligence Centre (EU INTCEN) is not, strictly speaking, a policecooperation body, as it is the Directorate for European External Action Service (EEAS) and deals only with strategic analysis. On theStanding Committee to ensure the development and strengthening of operational cooperation on internal security matters within theUnion (COSI), it promotes coordination among the competent authorities of the member states.

PECULIARITIES OF THE INFLUENCE OF CIVIL SOCIETY ON STATE REGULATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY: ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina Zhukova ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
State Regulation ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Regulation Of Law

The peculiarities of the influence of civil society on the state regulation of law enforcement activities within the member states of the European Union are considered. A thorough analysis of regulatory and legal support and mechanisms for the practical implementation of active cooperation between civil society and law enforcement agencies of the European Union (Belgium, Great Britain, Germany, Poland, Finland, France, Hungary). Possibilities of wide involvement of civil society representatives in law enforcement activities using various forms and methods within the member states of the European Union are considered. It has been proven that the opinion of civil society on the functioning of the law enforcement system is one of the key factors in strengthening ties and improving the interaction of the above structures with representatives of the public sector, including individual citizens or NGOs. It is substantiated that using the most successful forms and methods of law enforcement, provided they adapt to the conditions of our country, it is possible to ensure more effective implementation of law enforcement. It is emphasized that important factors in the development of cooperation between law enforcement agencies and civil society on the basis of cooperation should be the formation of motivation and a functioning system of incentives for civil society. It is noted that, in order to fully implement the functions of law enforcement and crime prevention, it is necessary to directly influence the representatives of civil society on law enforcement activities by increasing the level of public, social and legal activity.

scholarly journals A leading role for the EU in drafting criminal law powers? Use of the Council of Europe for policy laundering

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-106
Author(s):  
Paul De Hert ◽  
Angela Aguinaldo
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Production Orders ◽  
The Eu

In light of the ongoing story on the regulatory steps towards electronic evidence and transnational production orders, civil rights organizations have expressed both alarm and astonishment on the regulatory initiatives in the Council of Europe regarding transnational production orders. Member states of the European Union (EU) engage actively in soft law entrepreneurship by allowing themselves to obtain directly from service providers subscriber and other communications content. This has not only been done domestically through national laws but likewise on a multilateral level as EU member states are now seen drawn towards the Council of Europe. Within said Council of Europe, member states are now enabled to stretch the extraterritorial powers exercised by their law enforcement authorities in obtaining electronic evidence through a controversial Guidance Note and soon, a Second Additional Protocol. Interestingly, throughout these developments, the EU remained passive but as of late, has come up with proposals for the European Production and Preservation Orders, among others. The mixture of alarm and astonishment among civil liberties representatives about the decision making procedures at the level of the Council of Europe can be best understood in a broader regulatory context of policy enterpreneurship, rent-seeking behaviour and, overall, rational choice institutionalism. Comparing the Council of Europe with the EU, the structure of the former makes it the more attractive venue for policy actors such as law enforcement authorities to maximize their benefits at the least amount of costs. Being competitors in policymaking vis-à-vis cooperation in criminal matters, the EU can however lose its sociopolitical ascendancy over time as an institutional venue to discuss cooperation matters. In light of this, one should not forget that two Europes coexist. These coexisting realities are now being used to the advantage of laundering policies, testing which forum would maximize benefits the most. These developments should caution us that there might be a systemic failure in ensuring safeguards in criminal investigations are always in place.

scholarly journals Law Enforcement Cooperation of the Member States of the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 338-342
Author(s):  
Natalia Mushak ◽  
Anastasiia Zaporozhets
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
External Action ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Internal Security ◽  
Main Instrument ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the study of law enforcement cooperation of the European Union Member States. The main bodiesresponsible for cooperation in the EU have been identified.It has been determined that the main instrument of police cooperation is the European Police Office, which is a central elementof the wider European internal security architecture. CEPOL has been proven to be the agency that develops, implements and coordinatestraining for law enforcement officers. The EU Analytical Intelligence Centre (EU INTCEN) is not, strictly speaking, a policecooperation body, as it is the Directorate for European External Action Service (EEAS) and deals only with strategic analysis. On theStanding Committee to ensure the development and strengthening of operational cooperation on internal security matters within theUnion (COSI), it promotes coordination among the competent authorities of the member states.

Bariery w przepływie pracowników na rynku wewnętrznym – stary problem w nowych odsłonach

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4 (1)) ◽  
pp. 39-54
Author(s):  
Robert Grzeszczak
Keyword(s):  
Equal Treatment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Criticism ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Will ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

The issue of re-nationalization (disintegration and fragmentation) of integration process is manifested by the will of some of the Member States to verify their relations with the European Union. In the age of an economic crisis of the EU and in relation to the large migration of the population, there has emerged strong social and political criticism, on the European level, of the integration process, with some Member States even consideringtheir withdrawal from the EU. In those States, demands forextending the Member States’ competences in the field of some EU policies are becoming more and more popular. The legal effects of the above-mentioned processes are visible in the free movements of the internal market, mainly within the free movement of persons. Therefore, there are problems, such as increased social dumping process, the need to retain the output of the European labour law, the issue of the so-called social tourism, erosion of the meaning of the EU citizenship and the principle of equal treatment.

Political aspects of security of the European Union Member States

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Security ◽  
New Institutions ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
The Eu

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.

The preliminary ruling procedure at the court of justice of the European Union and transformation of European anti-discrimination law

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 66-72
Author(s):  
Elena Sorokina
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

The preliminary ruling procedure is an essential feature of the EU legal system, which is a unique cooperation tool as part of the dialogue between the Court of Justice of the EU and national courts of the Member States. Its main purpose is to ensure uniform interpretation and application of the provisions of EU law with all Member States and to preserve the uniformity of the European legal system. The continuous use by national courts of the Member States of the mechanism of preliminary ruling and constructive inter-judicial cooperation, the Court of Justice has developed an extremely extensive case law on the prohibition of discrimination and with the result to introduce substantial changes in European anti-discrimination law.The preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice have shown its inclination to expand notions of what constitutes discrimination and in most cases the Court prompt by the desire to interpret the provisions of European law so as to ensure the full effectiveness of the law, as well as a willingness to promote and strengthen protection against discrimination in Europe. While the protection against discrimination on some grounds is stronger than others, however, the preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice are important contribution to the transformation of anti-discrimination law, promote change in the national legislation of the Member States and provide the more effective protection of human rights in general.

Social Investment as a Policy Platform

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Vandenbroucke
Keyword(s):  
Social World ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Social Investment ◽  
Education Spending ◽  
Overlapping Consensus ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Perspective ◽  
The Social ◽  
Broad Consensus ◽  
The Eu

This contribution argues for a truly reciprocal social investment pact for Europe: member states should be committed to policies that respond to the need for social investment; simultaneously, member states’ efforts in this direction—notably efforts by those in a difficult budgetary context—should be supported in a tangible way. Social investment is a policy perspective that should be based on a broad consensus between people who may entertain certain disagreements regarding the level of their empirical and/or normative understanding of the social world. For that reason, the expression of an ‘overlapping consensus’ is used for delineating social investment advocacy. Data on education spending show that we are far removed from a social investment perspective at the European Union (EU) level. This underscores the fact that social investment advocates need to clearly consider the role the EU has to play in social investment progress.

Ever Looser Union?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Schimmelfennig ◽  
Thomas Winzen
Keyword(s):  
Self Determination ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Core State ◽  
Member States ◽  
New Members ◽  
Treaty Negotiations ◽  
Differentiated Integration ◽  
Economic Preferences ◽  
New Policies ◽  
The Eu

Differentiated integration is a durable feature of the European Union and a major alternative for its future development and reform. This book provides a comprehensive conceptual, theoretical and empirical analysis of differentiation in European integration. It explains differentiation in EU treaties and legislation in general and offers specific accounts of differentiation in the recent enlargements of the EU, the Euro crisis, the Brexit negotiations and the integration of non-member states. Differentiated integration is a legal instrument that European governments use regularly to overcome integration deadlock in EU treaty negotiations and legislation. Instrumental differentiation adjusts integration to the heterogeneity of economic preferences and capacities, particularly in the context of enlargement. By contrast, constitutional differentiation accommodates concerns about national self-determination. Whereas instrumental differentiation mainly affects poorer (new) member states, constitutional differentiation offers wealthier and nationally oriented member states opt-outs from the integration of core state powers. The book shows that differentiated integration has facilitated the integration of new policies, new members and even non-members. It has been mainly ‘multi-speed’ and inclusive. Most differentiations end after a few years and do not discriminate against member states permanently. Yet differentiation is less suitable for reforming established policies, managing disintegration, and fostering solidarity, and the path-dependency of core state power integration may lead to permanent divides in the Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document