Examining the principle of mutual recognition in the EU legal order this volume asks whether the principle as developed in the internal market, can and should be applied in judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the area of freedom, security, and justice.

The legal principle of ne bis in idem restricts the possibility of a defendant being prosecuted repeatedly on the basis of the same offence, act, or facts. This book describes obstacles that stand in the way of a single, autonomous, and uniformly applicable general ne bis in idem principle of EU law.

This book develops a conceptual framework of the principle of mutual trust in EU criminal law. Mutual trust is a household term in the EU criminal law vocabulary and is widely regarded to be a prerequisite for a successful application of mutual recognition. But despite its importance, the parameters of the concept are not clear. The book demonstrates that mutual trust is multi-faceted: combining the elements essential to a successful EU criminal law, as part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The book approaches trust from multiple angles. First, a study of social science literature. Second, a meticulous assessment of mutual trust in EU criminal law. Third, a study of trust in US interstate criminal justice cooperation. Finally, the book identifies a comprehensive approach to tackle trust related difficulties in EU criminal law. This timely book will be of great interest to anyone looking to gain a full picture of this core principle in EU criminal law.

Examining the principle of mutual recognition in the EU legal order, this book takes a cross-policy approach to focus on the principle in the internal market and in the criminal justice area. It asks whether the principle of mutual recognition, as developed in relation to the free movement provisions (internal market), can equally be applied in judicial cooperation in criminal matters (the area of freedom, security, and justice), and if such a cross-policy application is desirable. Divided into three parts, the book first looks at the way this principle functions in the internal market. Part II examines how the principle works in judicial cooperation in criminal matters, with the final part answering the book's central questions. In each part, further related questions are asked: What is the object of the principle of mutual recognition? Who are the main actors involved? How does the mechanism of mutual recognition operate (with an emphasis on the existing limits to mutual recognition)? How does mutual recognition relate to harmonization and to mutual trust? What is the relevance of equivalence requirements and the distribution of competence between the home (issuing) State and the host (executing) State? What are the main characteristics of the principle of mutual recognition? And is it a workable principle? Through an in-depth analysis of the relevant Treaty provisions, EU legislation, EU case law, and EU policy documents, the book comes to the conclusion that a cross-policy application of the principle of mutual recognition is both feasible and desirable.

Document from the year 2019 in the subject Law - European and International Law, Intellectual Properties, Tufts University, language: English, abstract: The focus of this book is the analysis of male sexual crimes in international criminal justice. The first part of the present research work is focused on the legal analysis of the relevant articles of international criminal court's Statute regarding the obligation of cooperation between states for the punishment of serious crimes against humanity and war. Judicial development, starting with the ad hoc tribunals and arriving at causes at various stages of proceedings still ongoing in the International Criminal Court (ICC), opens doctrinal and comparative national debates especially in the case of lacking states cooperation, seeking to elaborate specific topics such as the obligation of states cooperation, requests for assistance during preliminary investigations,during inquires, and confidential information. Court assistance to states parties participating in the Statute, suspending the execution of a request, the role of the prosecutor and the non-assistance of some states impede the development and operation of international criminal justice. The second part has attempted to analyze sexual crimes and especially the crime of male rape.The jurisprudence of international criminal tribunals and the ICC have tried to qualify rapeeither as a crime of genocide in the form of serious and physical injuries, even if notnecessarily permanent (lett.b) Art.6 of the Rome Statute; or as a crime against humanity wherethere are elements of context and above all material elements that emerge from the defenitionsgiven by the ad hoc tribunals and the elements of crimes; or even as a war crime in case it isimplemented to that of sexual violence, according to a geneder specific relationship tospeciem. Judges through the jurisprudence have included in this context any conduct of asexual type of aggression to human dignity that does not consist in an act of penetration andthat does not involve physical contract. The contrasts are always open. Due to the lack ofdealing with a "particular" crime and difficult to prove it or testify before an internationalcourt. The indication on the level of gravity of the crime is necessary for the relevance ofsexual violence and rape as crimes against humanity that we will see in the coming years.

Examining general principles of law provides one of the most instructive examples of the intersection between EU law and comparative law. This collection draws on the expertise of high-profile and distinguished scholars to provide a critical examination of this interaction. It shows how general principles of EU law need to be responsive to national laws. In addition, it is clear that the laws of the Member States have no choice but to be responsive to the general principles which are developed through EU law. Viewed through the perspective of proportionality, legal certainty, and fundamental rights, the dynamic relationship between the ingenuity of the Court of Justice, the legislative process and the process of Treaty revision is comprehensively illustrated.

In the EU's fast-growing Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, the principle of mutual recognition should play a key role in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters.Since mutual recognition was enshrined as a cornerstone of judicial cooperation in the EU by the European Council of Tampere in 1999, an increasing number of binding instruments based on this principle have been adopted in the framework of the EU's Third Pillar.The considerable impact of those instruments on national criminal legal systems has often required a major effort by Member States in adjusting their national legislation so that it complies with the new mechanisms agreed at EU level. What are the real difficulties encountered by Member States in the transposition of these legislative texts into national law and, even earlier, when the texts are being negotiated within the Council of the EU? What lessons can be learned from the early years of their practical implementation by the competent judicial authorities? And, above all, what will be the future role and scope of the principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters in Europe? The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the adoption of a new multi-annual programme (replacing the Hague Programme) to strengthen the EU's Area of Freedom, Security and Justice are both pending. In this crucial time of transition and uncertainty, the book seeks to provide answers to the above questions and many other related issues. Through its country by country approach covering the vast majority of the Member States, it intends to provide policymakers, practitioners, academics and researchers with a comprehensive analysis of the problems that have emerged and the solutions envisaged by each State in their implementation of mutual recognition instruments. The country chapters are followed by a final EU-wide analysis that seeks to identify common themes and obstacles and to consider future options and possible scenarios. The whole study, based on in-depth research combined with interviews conducted with hundreds of practitioners and experts from across the EU, amounts to a remarkable team performance carried out together with academics and researcher members of ECLAN (European Criminal Law Academic Network).

The Contract is the core tool of governance in a free market economy. An EU Contract Law Code is now on the political agenda because all three legislative bodies in the EU and most member states favour it in principle. In its communication of July 2001, the Commission proposed three major options: to enhance the existing EC Contract Law by eliminating inconsistencies; introducing a European Code which substitutes national laws; and introducing a European code which only supplements national laws. This book achieves three things: For the first time, European academia is discussing these three options in an extensive and systematic way with pros and cons, in a transparent and systematic way, along broad lines and often also important details. The book contains the views of all protagonists from all those who really drafted the models to all those who illustrated the potential of decentralized rule-making and invented the very idea of an Optional Code. This is the first book in which the optional Code, which is the alternative most likely to come, is thoroughly analysed at all. This work also contains a full map of design possibilities. It is the executive summary of what European academia thinks of the future of European Contract Law and a European Code. It is the Academic Green Paper on European Contract Law.