Die Verjährung als Herausforderung für die grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit in Strafsachen

2021 ◽  

The statute of limitations for criminal offenses varies within the European Union. This raises considerable problems for cross-border cooperation in criminal matters. Overcoming them was the subject of a comparative law research project with the aim of developing a first harmonization proposal for the statute of limitations in the EU. The publication presents the most important research results including a comprehensive analysis of the statute of limitations for criminal offenses and sanctions in 14 countries. The comparative law cross-section evaluates similarities and differences and draws conclusions that resulted in a harmonization proposal. For this purpose, a case study on the statute of limitations for fraud provided valuable insights. An analysis of whether a human right to a statute of limitations can be justified completes the comparison. The cross-section and the harmonization proposal are also available in English. With contributions by Robert Esser, Michael Faure, Victor Gómez Martín, Walter Gropp, Livia Häberli, Samantha Halliday, Rita Haverkamp, Gudrun Hochmayr, Krisztina Karsai, André Klip, Thomas Kolb, Marek Kulik, Susan Lazer, Marianne Johanna Lehmkuhl, Renzo Orlandi, Theodoros Papakyriakou, Andres Parmas, Magdalena Pierzchlewicz, Angeliki Pitsela, Sophie Sackl, Helmut Satzger, Lyane Sautner, Leandro Schafer, Arndt Sinn, Jaan Sootak, Zsolt Szomora, Stephen Thaman, Julien Walther, Jan Wenk and Ann Wood.

2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-172
Author(s):  
Krisztina Karsai

AbstractThe aim of the paper is to introduce and analyse the binary code of the main principle applied in legal assistance procedures in international criminal matters – the locus regit actum and the forum regit actum sub-principles are characterized by different dynamics and have different legal consequences. While locus regit actum requires the application of the procedural rules of the state that has been addressed with the legal assistance request, the forum regit actum principle asks for application of the requesting state’s rules on the given procedure. The result of the legal assistance procedure is the evidence assumed to be used in the criminal procedure to be carried out in the requesting state. The different concepts have very distinguished consequences in the scope of admissibility of the evidence and regarding the legal remedies against obtaining the evidence. Within the European Union, the related developments show a double paradigm shift in this regard – the initial followed locus regit actum was abandoned in 2000 in favour of the forum regit actum, but then in 2017, the member states of the EU opted once again for locus regit actum with the new regime of the European Investigation Order. Finally, the paper highlights the main issues of the concept of the free movement of evidence and shares in addition to positive evaluation, criticism on the subject as well.


2016 ◽  
pp. 90-108
Author(s):  
Marta Witkowska

The aim of the article is to present possible scenarios on maintaining democracy in the EU, while assuming different hypothetical directions in which it could develop as a federation, empire and Europe à la carte. Selected mechanisms, norms and values of the EU system that are crucial for the functioning of democracy in the European Union are the subject of this research. The abovementioned objective of scenario development is achieved through distinguishing the notions of policy, politics and polity in the research. In the analysis of the state of democracy in the European Union both the process (politics) and the normative approach (policy) have been adopted. The characterised norms, structures, values and democratic procedures in force in the EU will become a reference point for the projected scenarios. The projection refers to a situation when the existing polity transforms into a federation, empire or Europe à la carte. The article is to serve as a projection and is a part of a wider discussion on the future of the basis on which the European Union is build.


2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199593
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schomburg ◽  
Anna Oehmichen ◽  
Katrin Kayß

As human rights have increasingly gained importance at the European Union level, this article examines the remaining scope of human rights protection under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While some international human rights instruments remain applicable, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union did not become part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The consequences, especially the inapplicability of the internationalised ne bis in idem principle, are analysed. Furthermore, the conditionality of the TCA in general as well as the specific conditionality for judicial cooperation in criminal matters are discussed. In this context, the risk that cooperation may cease at any moment if any Member State or the UK leave the European Convention of Human Rights is highlighted. Lastly, the authors raise the problem of the lack of judicial review, as the Court of Justice of the European Union is no longer competent.


Polar Record ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 361-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova ◽  
Kai Kokko ◽  
Sebastien Duyck ◽  
Nikolas Sellheim ◽  
Adam Stepien

ABSTRACTThe European Union's (EU's) intention of becoming a permanent observer in the Arctic Council and the reluctance of Arctic actors to grant it that status have made the union's aspirations in the Arctic the subject of a continuing debate. The discussion appears to be dominated by geographical considerations and the EU's gradually emerging Arctic policy. This article puts forward a different view of the EU's presence in the region, one drawing on an analysis of relevant EU competences. As a complex international actor, the EU has acquired a broad array of decision-making powers from its member states, powers that partly extend to Iceland and Norway via the EEA Agreement. Moreover, the EU has in many cases become a relevant actor in international negotiations and treaty making processes the outcomes of which are of crucial importance for the governance of the Arctic. Our argument in the third and concluding section is that only by including the EU in Arctic governance can the international community provide better prospects for the union to sensitise its policies and discourses to the Arctic realities and for other Arctic actors to understand how the union functions. This argument is supported by an analysis of the EU's restrictions on the import of seal products and the ensuing litigation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-187
Author(s):  
Pauline Melin

In a 2012 Communication, the European Commission described the current approach to social security coordination with third countries as ‘patchy’. The European Commission proposed to address that patchiness by developing a common EU approach to social security coordination with third countries whereby the Member States would cooperate more with each other when concluding bilateral agreements with third countries. This article aims to explore the policy agenda of the European Commission in that field by conducting a comparative legal analysis of the Member States’ bilateral agreements with India. The idea behind the comparative legal analysis is to determine whether (1) there are common grounds between the Member States’ approaches, and (2) based on these common grounds, it is possible to suggest a common EU approach. India is taken as a third-country case study due to its labour migration and investment potential for the European Union. In addition, there are currently 12 Member State bilateral agreements with India and no instrument at the EU level on social security coordination with India. Therefore, there is a potential need for a common EU approach to social security coordination with India. Based on the comparative legal analysis of the Member States’ bilateral agreements with India, this article ends by outlining the content of a potential future common EU approach.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-224
Author(s):  
D. A. Potapov

The paper examines the role of investment cooperation and national foreign investment regime as a means to promote China’s economic and political interests and to respond to new global challenges that the country faces nowadays. To this end, the author examines the main stages of China’s liberalization of the legal regime for foreign investment from the end of the 1970s with a special focus on a new foreign investment law. In doing so the author attempts to link the evolution of investment regulation in the PRC with the dynamics of international relations development and the changing role of China as a regional and global actor. The author emphasizes that a trend towards the emergence of a polycentric world order not only provokes the rise of international tensions but also provides new incentives to promote dialogue and enhance cooperation between states and non-governmental actors, particularly by encouraging foreign investments. At the same time, there is a growing need to improve regulatory mechanisms for direct foreign investments. All these contradictory trends have directly affected China’s foreign investment regime reform. In this context the investment cooperation between the PRC and the European Union is of particular importance. The EU possesses a set of innovative technological solutions and competencies that are of particular interest to the Chinese leaders in the context of their efforts to modernize the country’s economy. The paper examines the volume, dynamics and key directions of investment flows between China and the EU member-states. The fact that after seven years of difficult negotiations, the EU and China managed to develop a special bilateral regulatory mechanism — EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment — underscores again the importance of this cooperation for both parties. Even though the EU has suspended the ratification of this deal on the pretext of human right violations in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, the author concludes, that in the future this agreement will come into force, since the very logic of the emerging polycentric world order urges for deeper cooperation between the EU and China. In this context, the investment regulation appears not only as a means to protect the Chinese economic interests, but also as an instrument to strengthen China’s international positions in the changing global context.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Radka MacGregor Pelikánová

The commitment of the European Union (EU) to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is projected into EU law about annual reporting by businesses. Since EU member states further develop this framework by their own domestic laws, annual reporting with CSR information is not unified and only partially mandatory in the EU. Do all European businesses report CSR information and what public declaration to society do they provide with it? The two main purposes of this paper are to identify the parameters of this annual reporting duty and to study the CSR information provided by the 10 largest Czech companies in their annual statements for 2013–2017. Based on legislative research and a teleological interpretation, the current EU legislative framework with Czech particularities is presented and, via a case study exploring 50 annual reports, the data about the type, extent and depth of CSR is dynamically and comparatively assessed. It appears that, at the minimum, large Czech businesses satisfy their legal duty and e-report on CSR to a similar extent, but in a dramatically different quality. Employee matters and adherence to international standards are used as a public declaration to society more than the data on environmental protection, while social matters and research and development (R&D) are played down.


The article is devoted to the research of the possibilities of cooperation between the European Union (EU) and Ukraine in the use of blockchain technologies. The transition to the blockchain allows to minimise costs and maximise the results of economic activity. The experience of using blockchain technologies by world corporations is analysed. The subject of the research in the article is the potential of economic cooperation between the EU and Ukraine in the field of implementation and use of blockchain technologies. The purpose of the article is to find out the economic prospects of cooperation between the EU and Ukraine in the use of blockchain technologies. Tasks: researching of tendencies of development of blockchain technologies and possible variants of their implantation in activity of the Ukraine’s enterprises, searching for benefits from cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the field of use of blockchain technologies. General scientific used research methods: analysis – to determine the peculiarities of the use of blockchain technologies in the EU, synthesis – to find opportunities for cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the use of blockchain technologies. The obtained results: based on the analysis of the dynamics of changes in the field of enterprise technology, problematic aspects are identified and the main advantages of the transition from the traditional management model to blockchain platforms are identified, and the economic benefits of locating mining farms in Ukraine compared to some EU countries are calculated. Conclusions: using of blockchain technologies by modern enterprises gives them a number of competitive advantages, including saving on labor costs, increased information security, reduced costs for quality control of products/services, etc. Blockchain allows to promote more sustainable cooperation between EU and Ukrainian companies not only in trade, but also in industry, finance and energy. By implementing joint blockchain systems with the EU, Ukraine can provide mining with low costs for electricity and wages.


2021 ◽  
pp. 43-59
Author(s):  
Tomasz Dubowski

In the discussion on the EU migration policy, it is impossible to evade the issue of the relation between this policy and the EU foreign policy, including EU common foreign and security policy. The subject of this study are selected links between migration issues and the CFSP of the European Union. The presented considerations aim to determine at what levels and in what ways the EU’s migration policy is taken into account in the space of the CFSP as a diplomatic and political (and subject to specific rules and procedures) substrate of the EU’s external action.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-294
Author(s):  
Kim Van der Borght ◽  
Jianmei Gao ◽  
Xiaoting Song

To recognize an origin-linked production model and the typicity of the products, the European Union (EU) has introduced the Geographical Indication (GI) protection regime. By requiring that relevant production steps must take place in the defined locale, the regime confers exclusive production rights on the local producers. There are two GI categories in the EU. The first is Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), covering products with a qualitative link to both natural and human factors in the designated region. The second is Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), the scope of which overlaps with PDO and covers products that have a qualitative or reputational link with their regional origin. This article examines whether exclusive rights are necessary and appropriate to fulfil their objectives and argues that these rights, when extended to human factors and reputation, cannot always be justified. It is argued that the overlapping scope of the subject matter undermines the ability of these two GI protection categories to provide transparent and trustworthy information for consumers. Finally, this article proposes to redefine the scope of the subject matter and the protection level for PDO and PGI by approaching the product/origin link from a resource utilization, integration and sustainability perspective. *Corresponding author: [email protected]. The research for this article was partially funded by Vrije Universiteit Brussel/China Scholarship Council Joint Scholarship and the National Social Science Fund of China (Grant No. 16 ZDA236).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document