Search

European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2020 5(3), 1271-1288, I. Introduction. – II. La confiance mutuelle face aux violations des valeurs européennes. – II.1. La mise en place de la confiance mutuelle dans la coopération judiciaire pénale comme base constitutionnelle de la reconnaissance mutuelle. – II.2. L’exception d’ordre public à la reconnaissance mutuelle: entre ordre public national et ordre public européen. – III. La valeur commune d’État de droit fondement de la confiance mutuelle et moteur d’une (nouvelle) justice pénale européenne. – III.1. La notion d’autorité judiciaire dans le cadre du MAE. – III.2. L’exigence d’une protection juridictionnelle effective. – IV. Remarques conclusives., This Article discusses the impact of the Court of Justice’s case law on EU criminal justice through the prism of mutual trust and mutual recognition. EU criminal justice is one of the fields of EU law that rapidly develops. Such developments can only happen within a context of mutual trust between EU Member States and, more particularly between national judicial authorities. In this respect, it is essential that these authorities abide by the common values upon which the EU is founded. Although these values are not clearly defined in the Treaty, the Article reveals how the Court of Justice actually shapes cooperation in criminal matters. Two distinct (r)evolutions are taking place. Firstly, in exceptional circumstances, the Court of Justice allows judicial authorities to refuse the execution of foreign decisions that seriously undermine a fundamental right which, for its part, gives expression to a common value. The exceptional circumstances doctrine operates like a judicial sanction against States which do not respect the EU values. Secondly, a quieter revolution is underway through the application to criminal matters of the doctrine of autonomous concepts of Union law. While defining essential concepts of criminal justice, the Court of Justice also defines certain common values. The message here is preventive. If a Member State wishes to benefit from effective judicial cooperation, it must make sure that its criminal justice system respects EU values. If a criminal justice system remains an instrument of the nation State necessary for the protection of domestic values, as soon as it enters the European sphere national values, however, it must align with European values.

This article tries to pin down the conditions under which Member States act within the scope of application of EU law when the Union has exercised its competence in the criminal ‘Area of Freedom, S...

In the case Wolzenburg, the principle of non-discrimination of European Union citizens is applied to the European arrest warrant. The implementation of the European arrest warrant by the Member States cannot escape a control of proportional- ity made by the Court. Member States may impose a period of residence of five years to foreign Europeans citizens in order for them to rely on an optional ground for non-execution of a European arrest warrant (Article 4(6) of the Framework Deci- sion on the European arrest warrant). Home nationals are not obliged to comply with a residence requirement. It is possible for Member States to justify an exception to the principle of non-discrimination of European citizens with a legitimate inter- est. The chances of social reintegration of a person convicted constitute such an interest. The national measure resulting in a difference of treatment must be proportional to that interest.

International audience

Il progetto si propone di analizzare come il riconoscimento reciproco delle decisioni in materia penale (in particolare nel contesto del mandato d'arresto europeo, della decisione quadro 2008/909 sul trasferimento dei prigionieri e della decisione quadro 2008/947, relativa all'applicazione del principio del reciproco riconoscimento delle sentenze e decisioni di sospensione condizionale) interagisce con la tutela dei diritti fondamentali dei cittadini interessati. Lo scopo del progetto è quello di migliorare la cooperazione giudiziaria in materia penale e lo scambio di best practices nel pieno rispetto dei diritti fondamentali dei cittadini.