Printer-friendly version

The Court of Justice’s Self-restraint of Reviewing Financial Assistance Conditionality in the Chrysostomides Case

Insight

Abstract: In the Chrysostomides case (joined cases C-597/18 P, C-598/18 P, C-603/18 P and C-604/18 P Council v Chrysostomides & Co. and Others ECLI:EU:C:2020:1028), the Court of Justice (ECJ) confirmed its previous finding that the Eurogroup has only an informal and intergovernmental nature. Building on the cases Ledra...

Stranieri trattenuti alle frontiere esterne dell’Unione: il quadro di garanzie individuato dalla Corte di giustizia e le sfide del Nuovo patto sulle migrazioni e l’asilo

Insight

Abstract: This Insight discusses the Court of Justice’s judgment of 14 May 2020 in the joined cases C-924/19 and C-925/19, which concerned two couples of asylum seekers detained in the Röszke transit zone, at the Hungarian-Serbian border. The analysis focuses on the approach followed by the Court, that has addressed several issues under EU...

Halcyon Days for the Right to Silence: AG Pikamäe’s Opinion in Case DB v. Consob

Insight

Abstract: The case DB v. Consob (request lodged on 21 June 2019, case C-481/19), pending before the Court of Justice, deals with preliminary questions referred by the Italian Constitutional Court on the applicability and scope of a natural person's right to remain silent during administrative proceedings which may lead to the imposition of...

Pre-trial Detention and EU Law: Collecting Fragments of Harmonisation Within the Existing Legal Framework

Insight

Abstract: Pre-trial detention has yet to be harmonised under EU law, although evidence points to an overuse that may affect mutual trust. Other instruments however exist that might impact on the way national authorities use pre-trial detention. In this Insight, we seek to detect fragments of harmonisation within the existing legal framework...

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 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...

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...

Pages