Justice Cooperation Research Articles

EU CIVIL PROCEDURE AFTER THE LISBON TREATY

With the Lisbon Treaty, a new page was opened in the development of EU civil procedure. This is so because тhe Lisbon Treaty has introduced Article 81 (ex-Article 65 EC) as a separate Chapter 3 of Title V on an Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice. With this, civil justice cooperation has gained an autonomous character and become distinct sub-area of the EU policy on Freedom, Security, and Justice.1 More importantly, the approximation of Member States’ civil procedural rules, provided for in Article 81 of the Lisbon Treaty, has gained a central role in the establishment and proper functioning of this Area and the EU in general. Precisely because of this, the subject of analysis of this paper is the new trend in the development of the civil procedure of the EU after the Lisbon Treaty, the advantages that this trend offers versus the old regime in EU and the future directions of development of the civil procedural law of the EU.

Navigating criminal justice cooperation: A French perspective on EU framework decisions

This article provides a nuanced exploration of the implications of EU criminal justice cooperation, particularly within French probation and judicial services. Focusing on EU Framework Decisions 2008/947/JAI and 2009/829/JAI, the article delves into their impact and adaptation in France, offering insights into challenges, adaptations, and practical considerations from the French standpoint. The article contextualises the implications of EU Framework Decisions by integrating valuable insights from the French probation and judicial services. Statistical data and case analyses illustrate practical challenges and applications within the French criminal justice landscape. The article highlights specific challenges faced within the French criminal justice system, such as prison overcrowding and the treatment of foreign nationals. It emphasises enhanced communication, trust, and collaboration among stakeholders within the European criminal justice system. Addressing the adaptation of EU Framework Decisions in France, the article navigates the complexities involved in aligning European law with national legislation and the delicate balance required to maintain sovereignty while embracing cooperative legal frameworks. The nuanced cultural perspectives permeating the French criminal justice landscape are examined to comprehensively understand the unique challenges and adaptations within the French context. The article also discusses the paradox between establishing European probation standards and the challenges in building trust among probation officers and stakeholders across European nations, offering potential strategies for improvement in European criminal justice cooperation. In conclusion, this article provides valuable insights into the complexities and challenges within European criminal law, offering directives for enhanced collaboration and effectiveness within the European legal landscape. It is a pivotal analysis contributing to informed discussions and policy decision-making within European criminal justice cooperation.

The Joint Investigation Team in Ukraine: An Opportunity for the International Criminal Court?

Abstract During the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, a joint investigation team (JIT) with members of seven States and a participant from the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was set up on alleged core international crimes committed in Ukraine. It is an unprecedented development that the OTP joins a JIT with national authorities under the auspices of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust). This essay analyses how the OTP’s participation in the JIT in Ukraine may affect the proactive complementarity of the ICC. It identifies the benefits of a JIT tool and the potential consequences of the OTP’s engagement in a JIT for its independence and impartiality. It argues that despite concerns and challenges, the OTP’s participation in a JIT offers a novel modality of implementing the policy of proactive complementarity through two-track cooperation and assistance.

Police and criminal justice co-operation after Brexit

ABSTRACT The article will evaluate the current state of UK-EU police and criminal justice cooperation and its implications for UK criminal justice policy. The article will place current developments within the broader historical and constitutional context of the ambivalent UK participation in the EU area of criminal justice before Brexit and highlight the significance of criminal justice and police practitioners in shaping UK European policy in the field. The article will map the constitutional evolution of the UK position in the field and assess the relevance of pre-Brexit challenges to the post-Brexit era. Looking at both how UK policy has been influenced – and has in turn influenced – EU criminal justice policy, the article will evaluate the provisions of the TCA and focus on key current challenges, including the constitutional constraints underpinning UK participation in EU police and criminal justice structures after Brexit, the challenge of regulatory divergence in the field (in particular regarding data protection) and the development of mutual trust and credible benchmarks of collaboration (including compliance with European human rights norms) after Brexit.

Efikasnost zajedničkog istražnog tima kao instrumenta za prikupljanje i razmenu dokaza u prekograničnim istragama

This paper primarily considers the legal framework for the formation and functioning of a joint investigation team at the level of the European Union, with specific reference to the consequences that these rules may have on shaping the legislative framework of the Republic of Serbia in this area. In analyzing the Serbian normative framework, the authors particularly focus on practical considerations in the process of setting up of a joint investigation team and the original elements of this progressive tool of international cooperation, established and funded by Eurojust (EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation). The second focal point of this paper is the support that may be provided by Eurojust in the process of formation and functioning of joint investigative teams, whose participants include both EU Member States and non-EU countries. In this regard, the authors consider the cooperation of the Republic of Serbia with Eurojust and present the opportunities for further strengthening of international cooperation with the EU Member States Union after signing the Cooperation Agreement between Eurojust and the Republic of Serbia in 2019. The advantages of this instrument of international cooperation are illustrated by referring to successful examples of joint investigation teams supported by Eurojust.

Negotiating the future: understanding the absence of UK-EU agreement on civil justice cooperation in family matters

Negotiating the future: understanding the absence of UK-EU agreement on civil justice cooperation in family matters

Criminal justice cooperation to combat transnational wildlife crime: An examination of cooperation between China and Africa

AbstractEffective criminal justice cooperation is critical to combat transnational wildlife crimes and disrupt illegal supply chains. However, few studies have examined criminal justice cooperation between China and African countries, which represent the primary global wildlife importers and exporters, respectively, in combating wildlife crimes. Prompted by the rampant wildlife trafficking between China and Africa, this article aims to fill the literature gap on the topic by examining how the existing forms of criminal justice cooperation (formal and informal cooperation) are currently being used and exploring the strengths, limitations and interactions of the two forms of cooperation through in‐depth interviews and comparative analysis. The findings indicate that both formal and informal criminal justice cooperation between China and Africa are crucial to combat transnational wildlife crime. Where formal cooperation is absent, the informal approach can promote cooperation to address wildlife trafficking to some extent. Although there has been gradual progress in criminal justice cooperation between China and Africa in recent years, this article shows that the immature development of formal criminal justice cooperation and the rare use of the anti‐money laundering mechanism for informal cooperation have resulted in sub‐optimally effective criminal justice cooperation. The article offers suggestions to enhance formal and informal criminal justice cooperation under the multi‐actor collaboration arrangement for future criminal justice cooperation between China and Africa to address transnational illegal wildlife trade.

Inter-Korean Union and Inter-Korean Criminal Justice Cooperation from the perspective of international law

Inter-Korean Union and Inter-Korean Criminal Justice Cooperation from the perspective of international law

Cases of the European Court of Human Rights significant for European integration of Ukraine: “Maidan judgments” concerning Ukraine, of 21 January 2021 (final on 21 April 2021)

The present case commentary is focused on cases concerning the so-called Maidan events of 2013-2014. The commentary suggests that the cases at issue underline existence of the long-standing systemic and structural problems within the domestic legal system of Ukraine, which need to be resolved, notably in order to harmonise the legislative and institutional framework of protection of human rights with the requirements of the European human rights law, which incorporates both the European Convention of Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The cases touch upon a number of previously deficient legislative provisions and institutional practices. However, most importantly they underline the need to adopt legislation to regulate and ensure protection of freedom of association. Such demand is clearly ensuing from the case-law of the Court and its findings in specific cases as to the lack of coherent legislative framework for this right. The extensive Council of Europe expertise in the area covered by the judgments is surely of reference to the implementation measures – the CPT standards, Venice Commission recommendations, other elements, as well as the findings of the International Advisory Panel are all of relevance. Change is needed urgently as the problems identified in the judgments of the Court clearly fall within the rule of law and justice cooperation aspects of interaction not only with the Council of Europe, but also with the European Union, under the Association Agreement with Ukraine.

POLICE COOPERATION OF POLAND AND GREAT BRITAIN IN SCOPE OF BREXIT

Leaving the UE by the UK has brought a number of consequences for bilateral Polish-British police and justice cooperation. The subject of the article was to present legal regulations, which provide the basis for international cooperation for British law enforcement agencies. The author analyzed and then evaluated the effectiveness of instruments of mutual cooperation. The articles focuses also on the assessment of Brexit consequences and its possible impact on the Polish-British police cooperation. It is worth emphasising that cross-border law enforcement cooperation - which includes police, customs, secret services and other law enforcement agencies, mainly concerns the most serious threats such as terrorism, organised crime, human traffi cking, money laundering, drug traffi cking or cybercrime. The article shows that the most unfavourable changes result from dropping the Schengen acquis by the United Kingdom - is disconnection from the second generation Schengen Information System. The article includes also information about The Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which has retained a number of important mechanisms for effective police cooperation between EU Member States and the United Kingdom. But although, as mentioned in the article, the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom provides upgrades of the tools of police and judicial cooperation, it is a matter of practise to verify these as sufficient.

A new ‘special relationship’ or a damage limitation exercise? EU–UK criminal justice cooperation after Brexit

A new ‘special relationship’ or a damage limitation exercise? EU–UK criminal justice cooperation after Brexit

The development of Europol’s external relations: Towards supranationalism?

This article examines the extent to which, if any, the development of Europol’s external relations over time has contributed to the integration of EU policing and criminal justice. More precisely, with reference to the academic debates on ‘intergovernmentalism’ and ‘supranationalism’, it examines the extent to and the ways in which the growth in Europol’s external relations has indicated a move away from intergovernmentalism towards more supranationalism in the EU’s policing and criminal justice cooperation. It does so by systematically examining the development of Europol’s external relations over time using a continuum ranging from ‘intergovernmentalism’ to ‘supranationalism’ as ideal-types, whilst arguing for not reducing supranationalism to the ‘Community method’. The article shows that the balance between intergovernmental and supranational features in the governance of Europol’s external relations has changed over time as the latter have been gradually reinforced. Starting from a position close to the intergovernmental pole of the continuum, Europol has moved significantly towards the supranational pole in its external relations, especially after the Europol Regulation began to apply in 2017.

Part Three of the EU-UK TCA – From a ‘Disrupted’ Area of Freedom, Security and Justice to ‘New Old’ Intergovernmentalism in Justice and Home Affairs?

During membership, the UK was the leading protagonist of ‘disrupted integration’ within the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. Part 3 of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) replaces differentiation with a ‘new old’ form of intergovernmental cooperation in justice and home affairs. The substance does simulate – to varying degrees – the EU law acquis in areas such as Passenger Name Records, Europol and Eurojust, and extradition. The protection of fundamental rights – in particular on data protection – has been embedded into the provisions. Part 3 also mandates future dynamic development of EU-UK security cooperation. However, the structures for governance and dispute resolution exclude any role for supranational political and legal institutions. Instead, the paradigm of diplomatic intergovernmentalism of the old Third Pillar of the European Community has been resurrected.

EU-UK criminal justice and security cooperation after Brexit: A perspective

The prospect of significantly reduced and potentially unstable EU-UK criminal justice cooperation under the 2020 Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) unless criminal justice professionals and academics can help to shape its future development. Key words Post-Brexit readjustment process; The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA); EU-UK criminal justice cooperation

Prisoner Transfer Within the Irish-UK Common Travel Area (CTA) After Brexit: Human Rights Between Politics and Penal Reform

The UK Government proposed in February 2020 that sentenced prisoner transfers with EU member states should continue after Brexit, but using a more ‘effective’ process than the existing CoE convention. The article analyses, with a particular focus on the Irish-UK CTA, the significance of continued UK human rights compliance for the achievement of this objective and the interrelationship of this issue with extradition/surrender (including the surrender of fugitive prisoners). It is concluded that Brexit has most probably raised the level of formal and institutional human rights compliance (including legal aid/assistance and the direct enforcement of prisoners’ rights in domestic courts) required from the UK for criminal justice cooperation with EU member states. Entering into such undertakings would not assist criminal impunity or the evasion of lawfully imposed penalties. Such undertakings, however, cannot help to resolve many problems inherent in prisoner transfer within the EU. The creation of a truly effective and rehabilitative transfer system would require (a) constructive UK Government participation in inter-governmental (including the UK devolved governments)/EU arrangements capable of incrementally resolving or effectively mitigating criminal justice cooperation problems and (b) acceptance at Westminster that this aspect of post-Brexit readjustment is likely to be intermittent and of long-duration.

Facilitating Cross-Border Criminal Justice Cooperation Between the UK and Ireland After Brexit: ‘Keeping the Lights On’ to Ensure the Safety of the Common Travel Area

Much of the cooperation on criminal justice matters between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland is based on EU level instruments. While there has been consideration of the broader impact of Brexit on the Good Friday Agreement and consensus on the need to avoid a return to a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, more detailed consideration has not been given to the effect that Brexit may have on continued criminal justice cooperation across the border. This article highlights the combined risks that Brexit presents for Northern Ireland in the form of increased criminality at a time when the loss of EU police cooperation mechanisms may result in a reduction of operational capacity and the removal of the legal architecture underpinning informal cooperation. Part 1 seeks to highlight the historical context of UK-Irish cooperation in policing matters. Part 2 explores the risk that post Brexit the Irish border may become a focus for criminal activity. The risks relating to increased immigration crime, smuggling of commodities and potential rise in terrorist activities are explored. Part 3 considers how the risks of increased criminal threats are exacerbated by the loss of EU criminal justice cooperation mechanisms and how this will affect UK-Irish cooperation specifically. Consideration is particularly given to the loss of information sharing systems. Part 4 considers how loss of EU level cooperation mechanisms could be mitigated. The viability of bilateral agreements between the UK and Ireland is considered alongside ways which police cooperation can be formalised to compensate for the potential loss of EU criminal justice information sharing systems. Nordic police cooperation is considered as a potential blueprint for the UK and Ireland.

Criminal Justice Cooperation Between the UK and Ireland After Brexit: Special Edition

Criminal Justice Cooperation Between the UK and Ireland After Brexit: Special Edition

Institutional Framework for EU Criminal Justice Cooperation : Refining Relations between the EJN, Eurojust and the EPPO

Institutional Framework for EU Criminal Justice Cooperation : Refining Relations between the EJN, Eurojust and the EPPO

Effective Devolution

Executive SummaryBrexit creates deep challenges for the UK's structure of governance; not least concerning the degree and manner in which powers are devolved within one of the most centralised countries in the world. Departing from the EU is likely to exacerbate regional inequalities and possibly social divide, while at the same time leading to further centralisation of powers, at least in the short term. Most Brexit analysis looks at the reorientation of the UK's external relationships, but the most significant impact may be on its internal constitutional affairs.While it is generally agreed that the UK needs more devolution, there is little discussion about how and why it sometimes succeeds, but also sometimes falls short of expectations. Ever since Adam Smith it has been known that economic prosperity, justice, and social cooperation are mutually reinforcing. Therefore, policy must be built around community and a sense of belonging, rather than a collection of anonymous individuals. The Core Design Principles set out by Elinor Ostrom provide a framework to transform governance structure at every level from the smallest communities all the way to parliament.Necessary institutional changes include giving local authorities much greater control over revenue-raising powers and therefore the services they wish to support. National legislatures must have the power to borrow for investment without limit, but with sole responsibility for repayment, to enhance local political accountability. A statutory body should be established, including representatives of the devolved assemblies and English regions, to address regional disparities, and there should be a much stronger regional presence in decision-making by HM Treasury and the Bank of England.

Eurojust and External Dimension of EU Judicial Cooperation

Eurojust – the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation – was first established by Council Decision 2002/187/JHA (Eurojust Decision). It is tasked primarily with the facilitation and coordination of criminal investigations and prosecutions of transnational crime in the countries that are members of the EU (Member States). However, effective criminal prosecution of most serious forms of trans-border crime may not depend only on judicial cooperation within the EU. Due to nature of this type of crime, third countries also have to be included if it is to be investigated and prosecuted in its entirety. This article describes how Eurojust, as an EU agency, can contribute to more effective judicial cooperation with non-Member States, what types of support it can provide, and on which legal bases the support can be provided. It describes the stage that development cooperation with third countries has reached since Eurojust became operational. This development now has to be continued under a new legal framework ‒ the new Eurojust Regulation ‒ bringing into play a new set of rules for Eurojust’s external relations with a much stronger role of the European Commission.