ECL Essentials Winter 2024/2025 PDF

Dawid Marko Organisational Issues & ECL Essentials ECL Exercises – C&CJ Winter Semester 2024/2025 [email protected] University of Gdańsk 1 Gdańsk, 18th October 2024 1...

Dawid Marko Organisational Issues & ECL Essentials ECL Exercises – C&CJ Winter Semester 2024/2025 [email protected] University of Gdańsk 1 Gdańsk, 18th October 2024 1 Agenda (1) Checking presence (2) Organisational issues (3) ECL: essentials (kick-off meeting J) (4) Review questions (5) Homework! J University of Gdańsk 2 2 1  Organisational Issues § Tutorials (exercises) – European Criminal Law (“ECL”) § Number of Tutorials: 5 meetings of 3 academic hours each (15 hours in total) § Breaks! J My proposition: 1,5 h of Tutorials – 15 mins of break – 45 mins of Tutorials – we end earlier? § Let’s commence at 8:30! § Difficult issues – feel free to ask for additional explanation J University of Gdańsk 3 3 Rules for Participation in Tutorials § Participation in Tutorials: mandatory § Each absence should be excused in the manner specified in the Study Regulations and must be made up, i.e. a part of the missed lesson must be passed (please send an e-mail for details in each case). § Absences should be made up within two weeks of the class to which the absence relates. University of Gdańsk 4 4 2  Rules for Participation in Tutorials § Excuses for absences should be made as soon as the reason for the absence has ceased (by email or during the consultation). § In case of doubt or insufficient documentation, the Vice-Dean decides on the excuse for the absence. § The course teacher notifies the Vice-Dean if a student's unexcused absence exceeds 30% of the total course load for the semester and submits documents confirming the student's absence, in particular the attendance list. University of Gdańsk 5 5 Rules for Participation in Tutorials § Students who can foresee in advance an absence for excused reasons on more than one exercise date are obliged to agree in advance with the teacher the dates for passing the respective parts of the material. § Absence should be justified (§ 12, para. 2 of the Study Regulations): § a medical certificate of temporary inability to participate in Tutorials; § a certificate of participation in a meeting of UG bodies or committees, boards or teams that are not UG bodies; § a certificate of representation of the UG in a national or international sports competition; § a certificate of participation in a research, research and development or teaching project § by indicating other important reasons which make it impossible to participate in Tutorials and which would justify the excusal of the absence. University of Gdańsk 6 6 3  Conditions of Passing the Tutorials § Participation in Tutorials (according to previously discussed rules) § Activity during Tutorials J § Colloquium (final test?) § Form: form equivalent to the exam form (or not)? § Scope: you will be informed of the scope of the material and the date in advance § Term: probably at the last meeting; § Resit test: negative grade only, within two weeks (two consultation dates) unless another date is set; no later than the last consultation before the session. University of Gdańsk 7 7 Recommended literature Literature indicated in the syllabus and recommended by Professor during the lecture + specific reading materials. Polish (accessible in our faculty’s library): A. Grzelak, M. Królikowski, A. Sakowicz (red.), Europejskie prawo karne (2012) – free remote access (Legalis) M. Kusak, Postępowanie karne w sprawach międzynarodowych. Podręcznik praktyczny (2017) M. Kusak, Dowody zagraniczne. Gromadzenie i dopuszczalność w polskim procesie karnym. Przewodnik z wzorami (2018) English: Valsamis Mitsilegas, European Criminal Law (2022) André Klip, European Criminal Law (2021) Kai Ambos, European Criminal Law (2018) – free remote access *Roberto E. Kostoris (ed.), Handbook of European Criminal Procedure (2018) – free remote access http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/p/how-to-read-cjeu-judgments-deciphering.html http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/p/how-to-read-eu-legislation.html http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/p/studying-eu-law-catherine-barnard.html University of Gdańsk 8 8 4  E-learning I warmly recommend the e-learning developed by the Academy of European Law (ERA) Only 3 hours Can be considered as a supplement to the material from the class. Link: https://era- comm.eu/moodle/course/view.php?id=924# section-1 University of Gdańsk 9 9 Other matters Office Hours/Consultations: Stationary (please check my UG’s employee page) Thursdays, 3.00 p.m. – 4.00 p.m. / 6 p.m. – 6.30 p.m. University of Gdańsk 10 10 5  Any questions, etc.? J University of Gdańsk 11 11 Any special wishes? JJJ University of Gdańsk 12 12 6  ECL: In search of a definition… University of Gdańsk 13 13 Quick question to get started… What exactly is “European Criminal Law”? Good question, isn’t it…? J But, first of all… what is the criminal law anyway? University of Gdańsk 14 14 7  (Substantive) Criminal Law social blame / behavioural norm sanction stigma (deterrence) many on the CoE/EU partly on EU level missing on EU level level (competition law) University of Gdańsk 15 15 What is “European Criminal Law” then? ü General (umbrella-like) term, used to refer to: Ø substantive and procedural criminal law standards adopted within the framework of EU activities (narrower sense) Ø as well as such rules adopted within the framework of the Council of Europe (broader sense) Ø which aim to harmonise national criminal law (substantive and procedural). ü It is therefore not possible to speak of a comprehensive, independent and self-contained criminal law system of its own – instead, it is possible to speak of various forms of influence of the ECL on national law (the phenomenon of „Europeanisation” of criminal law) + multicentric system – different legal acts of different character from different sources Ø conventions and other normative acts adopted within the framework of the Council of Europe Ø principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions Ø normative acts specific to the EU ü European criminal law resembles more an aggregate/conglomerate, a kind of system that binds together the normative solutions (instruments) adopted in particular areas (fields) – an University of Gdańsk "umbrella-like system” (puzzle with missing pieces) 16 16 8  What is “European Criminal Law” then? § General principles (guarantees) adopted within the framework of the CoE and the EU and their relevance for the national legal order (criminal law) § Approximation of national legislation in the area of substantive and procedural criminal law § Cross-border cooperation (police and judicial cooperation) and European criminal procedure § Institutions with a supranational character (examples?) University of Gdańsk 17 17 Definition proposals European criminal law (Kai Ambos) Kind of umbrella term covering „all those norms and practices of criminal and criminal procedural law” based on the law and activities of the EU (narrower sense) and the CoE (wider sense) and leading (or aiming to lead) to widespread harmonisation of national criminal (procedural) law. European criminal law (Andre Klip) Multilevel field of law in which EU has normative influence on either substantive criminal law / criminal procedure, or on the co-operation between the MS. It is supplemented by the areas where the EU directly enforces criminal law: namely, competition law and the EPPO. Europejskie prawo karne (red. A. Grzelak, M. Królikowski) Rodzaj regionalnego systemu prawa, będący zbiorem norm karnoprawnych (sensu largo) o charakterze materialnym, procesowym i wykonawczym. Składa się z: – międzynarodowego prawa karnego przyjętego w ramach Rady Europy – unijnego prawa karnego University of Gdańsk 18 18 9  ECL: Actors University of Gdańsk 19 19 https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/european-union University of Gdańsk 20 20 10  CoE v. EU: Imagine, that… § European states are just like football clubs (not necessarily representing Polish league… J). § Several countries are increasingly irritated by the current level and quality of their shared passion: the low level of play, doping, rampant corruption, etc. The clubs want to join forces and change situation together. They have various options. § Firstly, clubs can conclude an agreement called, for example, the 'Football Fairness Charter', in which they will set out minimum standards to counter each of the problems identified above. § However, these provisions will only be of a material nature. § Their implementation and enforcement at the level of each club will remain the responsibility of each club- party to the agreement (i.e. club authorities, e.g. board, CEO, etc.) § Consequently, some clubs will zealously implement the content of the Charter in their internal regulations, with the consequence that the provisions of the Charter will be applied with full rigour by the clubs’ authorities. § At the same time, at another club, the Charter will be tucked away in the deepest drawer of the President's desk so that he never has to look at it again… § But there is a lack of an external mechanism to enforce compliance with the Charter. Only some MISS ~ University of Gdańsk pressure can be exerted. 21 21 CoE v. EU: Imagine, that… § Secondly, clubs can opt for an even more ambitious solution. § Clubs can set not only minimum standards, but also establish a common mechanism to enforce them. § Clubs can set up an organisation called, for example, the 'Football Fairness Federation’. § The Federation will be given the power by the clubs (transfer of powers from the club level to the federation level) to set rules that are binding on the clubs… § …and to oversee the implementation of the Charter at the specific club level. § Each club will have representatives of the Federation who will defend the interests of the Federation and see to the implementation of the rules adopted within its framework. § The Federation representatives supervise the authorities of the clubs in accordance with the internal rules of the Federation. § The decisions issued by the courts of the Federation, concerning the activities and policies of the University of Gdańsk Federation itself, are final and binding for clubs. 22 22 11  Actors and models of international cooperation § Model I: traditional model of international cooperation, norms of a purely substantive nature § Model II: fully-fledged federation, equipped with the competence to adopt substantive as well as procedural norms Q: Does either of these models represent the CoE or the EU? University of Gdańsk 23 23 Let’s consider: § Who enforces the law at the internal level, how and what rules will govern the procedure for exercising this law? Institutions (who?) Rules (what rules?) Procedures (how?) University of Gdańsk 24 24 12  A quick quiz! 1. Are there decentralised EU courts deciding individual cases in the Member States? Or do centralised courts adjudicate on all addressees of EU law? national (a) national institutions (courts) thus become servants of two masters: the national States and the EU in Poland 1 court Eu (b) It is the subject matter of the case or problem at hand which decides which master the national institution is supposed to serve at a given moment. Example? University of Gdańsk 25 25 A quick quiz! 2. Does a uniform EU criminal (or civil) procedure exist? The principle of national procedural autonomy (a) if the EU has its own procedural rules, they take precedence over national rules; (b) if there are no EU rules on the matter, it is the national procedural responsibility to enforce EU law following the general national rules and procedures; (c)but, there are two qualifications to such full national procedural autonomy: (i) requirement of equivalence – equivalence is in essence a prohibition of discrimination. EU law-based claims cannot be treated less favourably than comparable ‘purely national’ claims (ii) requirement of effectiveness – it requires not only that the enforcement of EU law-based claims cannot be rendered practically impossible, but also not excessively difficult. in the end – the principle of effective judicial protection University of Gdańsk 26 26 13  A quick quiz! 3. Principles? § The perhaps most significant pre-emption of Member States’ autonomy occurred not on the level of procedures or institutions, but on the level of principles, which provide for the overall status of EU law in the Member States. § Principles like direct effect, primacy, or indirect effect are the overall rules of engagement between the systems: EU law and the national law. § They do not determine which particular institution shall implement EU law or according to which procedure it shall be applied à they determine what happens in cases of divergence or even collisions between national law and EU law. § The logic of the evolution of these principles is nonetheless the same as the one of ‘mere’ institutions and procedures according to which EU law is enforced in the Member States. In its key decisions in Van Gend en Loos and Costa the Court pre-empted the potential national choice and diversity with respect to the overall status of EU law in the Member States. University of Gdańsk 27 27 Actors and models of international cooperation When is a national case within the scope of EU law? That will be typically the case in three scenarios: § (i) The national authority is directly applying an EU legal source at the national level (direct application of an EU source of law). The subject matter of the case at hand is covered by an EU law act, which the national authority applies. § (ii) The national authority is applying rules of national origin, which are, however, the national implementation of an EU law obligation (implementation of an EU obligation). That will typically be the case of directives. While formally, the national authority is likely to apply provisions of national law, there are EU law rules in the background that are being transposed and upheld by the Member State at the national level. § (iii) Although not initially covered by an EU law legislative act, national rules in question enter into conflict with EU law rules. As a principle, no need for any transborder element! University of Gdańsk 28 28 14  Fifty shades of EU… § Cooperative Federalism? I theirs own kind § A sui generis organisation? ass by itself § Redefinition of state sovereignty: ØThe triumph of legal cosmopolitanism ØBut, at the same time, however, on ECL’s ground national traditions still prevail – legal acts must be implemented into national legal systems University of Gdańsk 29 29 The Council of Europe (and criminal law) § Of particular relevance are: § Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, done at Rome on 4.11.1950 (OJ 1993, No. 61, item 284, as amended) (ECHR) and the additional protocols to the Convention. § Interpretation of the above acts made in connection with the jurisprudential activity of the ECtHR (see Article 32 ECHR in conjunction with Article 91 of the Polish Constitution in conjunction with Article 9 of the Polish Constitution) § Conventions adopted within the framework of the CoE (a)approximation of national criminal law (substantive and procedural) – e.g. Convention on Cybercrime (ECJ No 185) – see Additional Protocol No. 2 on enhanced co-operation and disclosure of electronic evidence (CETS No. 224) (b)cooperation in criminal matters – e.g. Extradition Convention § Recommendations and guidelines of the Committee of Ministers § European Committee on Crime Problems (CDPC) and its activities Full list of RE conventions, recommendations and others acts adopted: https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list University of Gdańsk 30 30 15  The Council of Europe (and criminal law) The normative acts adopted are international law – the sovereignty of the States Parties is therefore crucial Consequence 1: States are only bound by the content of the Convention if they have ratified the Convention applying their internal, constitutional rules Consequence 2: States may make reservations and declarations which limit the effect of the conventions concerned (e.g. "State X shall not be bound by Articles X and Y of this Convention". Consequence 3: very limited possibility of legal enforcement of States Parties' obligations – lack of an effective mechanism for enforcing the obligations agreed upon University of Gdańsk 31 31 The European Union (and criminal law) § What is the EU actually? § Is not a federation – no competence-competence, no power to grant itself further, new competences other than those expressly provided for in the Treaties § It has only such competences as have been conferred upon it by the Member States § It is a UNION of sovereign Member States Article 4 (1) TEU In accordance with Article 5, competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. Article 5 (1 ) and (2) TEU 1. The limits of Union competences are governed by the principle of conferral. The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. 2. Under the principle of conferral, the Union shall act only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out therein. Competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. University of Gdańsk 32 32 16  The European Union (and criminal law) § principle of conferral (zasada kompetencji powierzonych) – The EU may only take measures which have a basis in the Treaty (Article 5(2) TEU) As a result: § principle of subsidiarity (zasada pomocniczości) – the Union shall act only if and in so far as the objectives of the every EU normative act requires a proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local justification for compliance with level, and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the the above-mentioned principles proposed action, be better achieved at Union level (Article 5(3) (see e.g. recitals of TEU) regulations/directives) § principle of proportionality (zasada proporcjonalności) – Information of Member States is the scope and form of Union action shall not exceed what is required – possible comments, necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties (Article 5(4) complaints to CJEU (legality of TEU) EU action) – see also Art. 69 TFEU Thus: a) the EU shares most of its competences in the area of criminal So-called "emergency brakes” law with the MS procedures have been introduced (see Art. 82 (3) and 83 (3) TFEU) b) EU criminal law standards are implemented and enforced at MS (national) level University of Gdańsk 33 33 The European Union and (criminal law) – after the Lisbon Treaty § Area of freedom, security and justice (Art. 3(2) TEU, Art. 67 et seq. TFEU - Part III, Title V TFEU) § previously, cooperation in this area was of intergovernmental nature (former Pillar III) § Police and judicial cooperation § mutual recognition principle (zasada wzajemnego uznawania) as a basis for judicial cooperation – judgments and judicial decisions rendered in one MS are recognised in another MS, i.e. they can be directly enforced (without a recognition procedure) in other MS (requirement: mutual trust, see Article 4(3) and Article 2 TEU) § free movement of judicial decisions, information and evidence, analogous to the movement of goods, services, capital or persons § a series of measures derived from EU secondary legislation (first measure: Framework Decision on EAW) § lack of full automatism § Harmonisation through approximation of the laws of the Member States § substantive criminal law the adoption of minimum rules relating to the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in the areas of particularly serious crime with a cross-border dimension, arising from the type or impact of such offences or from a specific need to combat them collectively (so-called “eurocrimes|) competence to adopt supranational criminal law standards in the strict sense for the protection of the EU's financial interests (Article 325 TFEU) § criminal procedural law – development of a common standard in certain areas of criminal procedural law, including cross-border cooperation a condition for (a means of) implementing the principle of mutual recognition (mutual trust) establishment of supranational procedural norms - e.g. regarding the European Public Prosecutor's Office strengthening of the protection of individual rights in criminal proceedings (Article 6 TEU, Stockholm Programme) § Institutionalisation § the creation of institutions operating on a daily basis in criminal law (e.g. European Public Prosecutor's Office, University of Gdańsk Europol, Eurojust) 34 34 17  Harmonisation of criminal procedural law Article 82 TFEU 1. Judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions and shall include the approximation of the laws and regulations of the Member States in the areas referred to in paragraph 2 and in Article 83. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt measures to: (a) lay down rules and procedures for ensuring recognition throughout the Union of all forms of judgments and judicial decisions; (b) prevent and settle conflicts of jurisdiction between Member States; (c) support the training of the judiciary and judicial staff; (d) facilitate cooperation between judicial or equivalent authorities of the Member States in relation to proceedings in criminal matters and the enforcement of decisions. 2. To the extent necessary to facilitate mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters having a cross-border dimension, the European Parliament and the Council may, by means of directives adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, establish minimum rules. Such rules shall take into account the differences between the legal traditions and systems of the Member States. They shall concern: # (a) mutual admissibility of evidence between Member States; (b) the rights of individuals in criminal procedure; (c) the rights of victims of crime; (d) any other specific aspects of criminal procedure which the Council has identified in advance by a decision; for the adoption of such a decision, the Council shall act unanimously after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. Adoption of the minimum rules referred to in this paragraph shall not prevent Member States from maintaining or introducing a higher level of protection for individuals. 3. (…) University of Gdańsk 35 35 Harmonisation of substantive criminal law Article 83 TFEU 1. The European Parliament and the Council may, by means of directives adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, establish minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in the areas of particularly serious crime with a cross-border dimension resulting from the nature or impact of such offences or from a special need to combat them on a common basis. These areas of crime are the following: terrorism, trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of women and children, illicit drug trafficking, illicit arms trafficking, money laundering, corruption, counterfeiting of means of payment, computer crime and organised crime. On the basis of developments in crime, the Council may adopt a decision identifying other areas of crime that meet the criteria specified in this paragraph. It shall act unanimously after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. 2. If the approximation of criminal laws and regulations of the Member States proves essential to ensure the effective implementation of a Union policy in an area which has been subject to harmonisation measures, directives may establish minimum rules with regard to the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in the area concerned. Such directives shall be adopted by the same ordinary or special legislative procedure as was followed for the adoption of the harmonisation measures in question, without prejudice to Article 76. University of Gdańsk 36 36 18  Harmonisation of substantive criminal law Article 325 TFEU 1. The Union and the Member States shall counter fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union through measures to be taken in accordance with this Article, which shall act as a deterrent and be such as to afford effective protection in the Member States, and in all the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. 2. Member States shall take the same measures to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union as they take to counter fraud affecting their own financial interests. 3. (…) 4. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, after consulting the Court of Auditors, shall adopt the necessary measures in the fields of the prevention of and fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union with a view to affording effective and equivalent protection in the Member States and in all the Union's institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. 5. (…) University of Gdańsk 37 37 The EPPO Article 86 TFEU 1. In order to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union, the Council, by means of regulations adopted in accordance with a special legislative procedure, may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust. The Council shall act unanimously after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. (...) 2. The European Public Prosecutor's Office shall be responsible for investigating, prosecuting and bringing to judgment, where appropriate in liaison with Europol, the perpetrators of, and accomplices in, offences against the Union's financial interests, as determined by the regulation provided for in paragraph 1. It shall exercise the functions of prosecutor in the competent courts of the Member States in relation to such offences. 3. The regulations referred to in paragraph 1 shall determine the general rules applicable to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, the conditions governing the performance of its functions, the rules of procedure applicable to its activities, as well as those governing the admissibility of evidence, and the rules applicable to the judicial review of procedural measures taken by it in the performance of its functions. 4. (…) University of Gdańsk 38 38 19  Police cooperation Article 87 TFEU 1. The Union shall establish police cooperation involving all the Member States' competent authorities, including police, customs and other specialised law enforcement services in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences 2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may establish measures concerning: (a) the collection, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of relevant information; (b) support for the training of staff, and cooperation on the exchange of staff, on equipment and on research into crime-detection; (c) common investigative techniques in relation to the detection of serious forms of organised crime. 3. The Council, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, may establish measures concerning operational cooperation between the authorities referred to in this Article. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament. (…) University of Gdańsk 39 39 “Multi-level system of fundamental rights protection” Source: K. Ambos, European…., p. 76. University of Gdańsk 40 40 20  Bringing Cinderella to the Ball: European integration on the road to EU criminal law § Initially – lack of competence in the area of criminal law, integration essentially in the economic area (four freedoms). Let us remember that in parallel, CoE, cooperation was developing. § Over time, the need to strengthen cooperation (police and judicial) in criminal matters is recognised. Main factors: § the development of serious and organised international crime § the "fifth freedom", an exponential increase in the number of cases with a cross-border element § the rise and development of international terrorism (e.g. the IRA, ETA, the 1972 Munich IO attack - beginnings of the TREVI group) § the collapse of the Eastern Bloc (concerns over the 'export of crime', the need to redefine essential security threats) § quite quickly it becomes apparent that the shape of national criminal law affects the effectiveness of achieving the objectives pursued by integration in the economic area - University of Gdańsk need to strengthen the protection of the EEC/EC's financial 41 interests 41 Bringing Cinderella to the Ball: European integration on the road to EU criminal law § But, at the same time, MS has had a big concerns right to punish § Ius puniendi is considered a particularly important manifestation of state sovereignty § Huge (also of model character) divergences between the criminal law (and procedural) systems of different states with the belief that each system is the 'best’ J § Importance of tradition – criminal law has been shaped in specific countries in specific ways, in a sense it symbolises the national identity and culture of a country (awareness of 'peculiarities') § It is difficult to harmonise a piece of criminal law without affecting the whole system (unlike in private law) – there are always some "contextual consequences or side-effects" University of Gdańsk 42 42 21  Bringing Cinderella to the Ball: European integration on the road to EU criminal law Thus… § Main trend – development of instruments for cross-border cooperation, enforcement of domestic judgments and decisions (Tampere, principle of mutual recognition) § Then – visible consequences of these instruments, recognition of the need for harmonisation of criminal procedural law (procedural rights) § common procedural standards as guarantee of mutual trust § establishment of an area of criminal justice, where fair trial rights for individuals are protected and law enforcement authorities works together guided by mutual trust and common values § The current goal: to eliminate the differences between the legal systems in criminal matters and establish the principles of cooperation between legal systems + fundamental rights protections § Effect: searching for compatibility, "compromise legislation", transposition (implementation) problems. Sometimes also: window-dressing effect J § Ultimate goal? Still not within sight! University of Gdańsk 43 43 Programme No. Date Topic 1 18/10/2024 Kick-off meeting: Organisational Issues & ECL Essentials. 2 25/10/2024 Institutionalisation. Harmonisation: Substantive Criminal Law 3 1/11/2024 Harmonisation: Criminal Procedural Law 8/11/2024 4 15/11/2024 Mutual Recognition Principles: the EAW, EIO 22/11/2024 5 29/11/2024 Ne bis in idem principle in the EU Law University of Gdańsk 44 44 22  Review questions 1. What is European criminal law? What is its nature and what ’micro-systems’ does it consist of? 2. What is the phenomenon of the Europeanisation of criminal law? 3. How does the CoE law affect national criminal law? 4. How does the EU’s law influence national criminal law? University of Gdańsk 45 45 Supplementary literature for those interested | Sources § A. Grzelak, M. Królikowski, A. Sakowicz (ed.), Europejskie prawo karne (2012), chapters I – II; § K. Ambos, European Criminal Law (2018), chapter I. § V. Mitsilegas, EU Criminal Law (2022), chapter I. § J. Öberg, The Normative Foundations for EU Criminal Justice: Powers, Limits and Justifications, open access (Bloomsbury Collections) § J. Öberg, EU Procedural Criminal Law After Lisbon [in:] J. Ouwerkerk, J. Altena, J. Öberg, & S. Miettinen (ed.), The Future of EU Criminal Justice Policy and Practice: Legal and Criminological Perspecives, 2019 University of Gdańsk 46 46 23  Homework! J § Please divide into groups of several people and prepare oral presentation (with ppt slides, if you want) on the following institutions: § European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) § Europol (is it the same as Interpol? Do we have a European FBI?). § Eurojust § European Judicial Network (EJN) § European Committee on Crime Problems (CDPC) § Try to capture the practical side of the activities of the above institutions, show some examples of activities, what these bodies are actually useful for, without quoting legislation. Max. 10 mins. University of Gdańsk 47 47 Homework! J § The subject matter of the presentation should include, in particular: § the idea of the institution in question (the genesis can be briefly presented); § a discussion of the legal basis and competences under primary and secondary law (treaties, regulation/decision, etc.) from a criminal law perspective; § the structure, organisation and operation (to the extent necessary); § the practical side of the activities of the above-mentioned institutions, to show some examples of what these bodies are actually used for, without unnecessarily quoting the rules J; § anything you find interesting and worth presenting! J Deadline: 2nd meeting, 25th October 2024 (next week) University of Gdańsk 48 48 24  Thank you for your attention! Next meeting: 25 October 2024 T: Institutionalisation. Harmonisation Consultations: of Substantive Criminal Law. every Thursday, More information may be shared on 3 p.m. – 4.00 p.m. University of Gdańsk the PS. in person 49 49 25