The Interplay Between the European Supervision Order and the European Arrest Warrant: An Untapped Potential Waiting to Be Harvested

Insight

Abstract: This Insight will discuss the European Supervision Order (ESO) in the context of its nexus with the EAW. It will give an overview of the ESO, focussing on the issue of the ways in which breaches of an ESO may be addressed. The argument is advanced that the ESO’s potential is currently untapped and that it has the ability to make...

Protecting Victims’ Rights Through the European Supervision Order?

Insight

Abstract: This Insight analyses the aim of victim protection in the Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA and its limited usefulness, despite being regarded as one of the main objectives of the recognition and enforcement of judicial decisions on supervision measures. After explaining the apparent aims of the Framework Decision, the Insight...

Special Focus on Pre-trial Detention and Its Alternatives Under EU Law: An Introduction

Highlight

Keywords: European Supervision Order – pre-trial detention – alternatives – harmonisation – judicial cooperation in criminal matters – right to personal liberty.
 

The use and misuse of pre-trial detention is a recurring concern for national penal systems. While the deprivation of liberty pending judicial...

The Reasons Behind the Failure of the European Supervision Order: The Defeat of Liberty Versus Security

Insight

Abstract: The European Supervision Order is an instrument of mutual recognition of judicial decisions essential to guarantee the exceptional nature of pre-trial detention. It also prevents discrimination of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings on grounds of nationality or residence, with regard to the possibilities of enjoying...

Towards Common Minimum Standards for Whistleblower Protection Across the EU

Insight

Abstract: This Insight describes the content of the Proposal for a Directive on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law, approved with amendments by the European Parliament and formally adopted by the Council on 7th October 2019. The Directive, which will now be formally signed and published in the...

Effetti indiretti della Carta dei diritti fondamentali? In margine alla sentenza Commissione c. Polonia (Indépendance de la Cour suprême)

Insight

Abstract: In the case law of the CJEU, Art. 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union is often read as based on a dichotomic distinction between national rules and behaviors falling within and, respectively, outside the scope of the Charter. Only the first category of rules and behaviors shall abide by the Charter, while the...

A Check Move for the Principle of Mutual Trust from Dublin: The Celmer Case

Insight

Abstract: This Insight comments on the recent referral for a preliminary ruling by the Irish High Court Minister of Justice and Equality v. Celmer (judgment of 12 March 2018, no. 2017 EXT 291) in the case concerning a Polish citizen sought by the Republic of Poland pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant. The key problem relates to...

L’attesa sentenza “Taricco bis”: brevi riflessioni

Insight

Abstract: The purpose of this work is to analyze the decision of the Court of Justice in M.A.S. judgment (Court of Justice, judgment of 5 December 2017, case C-42/17, M.A.S. and M.B. [GC]), after the reference for preliminary ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court, concerning the connection between the internal principle of...

Il seguito del caso Taricco: l’Avvocato generale Bot non apre al dialogo tra Corti

Insight

Abstract: The reference of the Constitutional Court for a preliminary ruling under Art. 267 TFEU in the follow-up of the Taricco case (Court of Justice, judgment of 8 September 2015, case C-105/14, Taricco et al. [GS]) should not be read as a bold challenge to the Court of Justice’s ruling, but as an opportunity for a real dialogue...

La sentenza A e B c. Norvegia della Corte di Strasburgo ridimensiona la portata del principio ne bis in idem

Insight

Abstract: In A and B v. Norway (judgment of 15 November 2016, nos 24130/11 and 29758/11) the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights restricted the scope of the ne bis in idem principle. Partly relaying on its previous case law, the Court upheld that Art. 4 of the Protocol no. 7 of the European Convention of...

Pages