The transnational gathering and use of criminal evidence is a complex and sensitive matter that affects basic principles inherent in national criminal justice systems. Replacing the mutual assistance regime (letters rogatory) by a mutual recognition regime intends to facilitate the admissibility of evidence obtained from the territory of another Member State. How much harmonization of criminal procedure is needed to guarantee the free movement of criminal evidence in the EU? Do we have to develop common procedural safeguards in the EU, or can we build in human rights clauses or procedural public order clauses by which respect for fundamental rights can be a ground for the non-recognition, non-execution or postponement of the order from the issuing state? John Vervaele is Professor in Economic and Financial Criminal Law at the University of Utrecht and Professor in European Criminal Law at the College of Europe of Bruges. The main topics in his research field are: enforcement of Union law; standards of due law, procedural safeguards and human rights; criminal law and procedure an regional integration; comparative economic and financial criminal law. He has realized a lot of research in these areas, both for Dutch Departments and European Institutions and also worked as a consultant for them.

This book deals with the gathering of evidence in cross-border investigations in Europe. The issue of obtaining evidence in and from European countries has been among the most debated issues of EU cross-border cooperation in criminal matters over the last two decades, going through periods of intensive discussions and showing an extraordinary adaptability to the evolution of EU legislation for criminal matters. On the other hand, the prosecution and investigations of cross-border cases pose unprecedented challenges in the European scenario, characterized by the increasing flow and activity of citizens over the territory of more than one country and therefore by the need to lay the foundations of a transcultural criminal justice system. The book analyses this complex topic starting with the current perspectives of EU legislation, thus providing a critical analysis of the legislative initiative aimed at introducing a new tool for gathering almost any type of evidence in other Member States, i.e., the European Investigation Order. On a second level, this study deals with the solution models and human rights challenges posed by the increasingly intensive dialogues between domestic and supranational case laws, and formulates essential guidelines for setting up a fair transnational enquiry system in Europe.

This volume analyses criminal procedural issues from a European perspective, particularly in connection with EU law and ECHR law. As such, it differs from previous works, which, on the one hand, generally focus only on EU law, and, on the other, address both procedural and substantial aspects, as a result of which the former receive inadequate attention. Indeed, criminal procedural matters in the European context have now reached a level of complexity, but also of maturity, that shows the features of a great design, which, even if not yet defined in all its aspects, appears sufficiently articulated to deserve to be explained in a systematic way. The book offers a guidance for practitioners, academics and students alike. It covers a broad range of topics: from the complex system of the sources of law to the multilevel protection of fundamental rights; from vertical and horizontal judicial and police cooperation to the instruments of mutual recognition, primarily the European Arrest Warrant; but also the European Investigation Order, the execution of confiscation orders, the ne bis in idem principle, the conflicts of jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgements. The book also reflects the latest regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

The European Council set out the 2007 specific program on 'Criminal Justice' as part of the General Program on Fundamental Rights and Justice. The concrete objectives of the program include the promotion of the principle of mutual recognition and mutual trust, eliminating obstacles created by disparities between Member States judicial systems, and improving knowledge of Member States' legal and judicial systems in criminal matters, and the exchange and dissemination of good practice. As part of this program, the European Commission awarded a contract to the Institute of International Research on Criminal Policy to conduct the study. This book is the result of that study. The initial aim of the study was to obtain up-to-date information on the national laws of the EU Member States on the gathering and handling of evidence and to analyze that information in the light of recent developments in legislation governing cross-border transmission of evidence, in particular the 2008 European Evidence Warrant. In addition, it was the intention of the European Commission to initiate preparatory work on a legal instrument that would expand the scope of application of the European Evidence Warrant in order to further replace the existing regime of mutual legal assistance within the EU by a mechanism based on the mutual recognition principle. As a result, the study was broadened to also assess whether or not a mutual recognition-based EU mutual legal assistance regime is desirable and feasible. Whereas the Green Paper on obtaining evidence in criminal matters (issued in 2009 by the European Commission) raises general questions on the matter, this book provides an in-depth and full-scale overview of the current situation relating to cross-border gathering, obtaining, and admissibility of evidence in criminal matters between the EU Member States, as well as clear-cut future legal and policy options. This book is essential reading for EU policy makers, as well as judicial and law enforcement authorities throughout the EU and from a broader international context. It will be particularly appealing also to the research community and anyone involved in or taking an interest in criminal policy initiatives in the EU.

Any effort to gather evidence may prove pointless without ensuring its admissibility. Nevertheless, the EU, while developing instruments for smooth gathering of evidence in criminal matters, is not taking much effort to enhance its admissibility. Due to the lack of common rules in this matter, gathering and use of evidence in the EU cross-border context is still governed by the domestic law of the member states concerned. This may lead to situations where, given the differences between legal systems across the EU, evidence collected in one member state will not be admissible in other member states. Due to the fact that the Lisbon Treaty opened the possibility to adopt minimum rules concerning, among other things, the mutual admissibility of evidence, this research investigates the concept of minimum standards designed to enhance mutual admissibility of evidence in the EU. Through a study of two investigative measures, telephone tapping and house search, the author examines whether coming to various common minimum standards is feasible and whether compliance with these standards would finally shape the as yet nonexistent concept of the free movement and mutual recognition of evidence in criminal matters in the EU. Essential reading for both national and EU policy makers, scholars and practitioners involved in cross-border gathering of evidence in the EU.

A practical tool for legal professionals who wish to strengthen their skills in applying the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in their daily work This is the second and expanded edition of a handbook intended to assist judges, lawyers and prosecutors in taking account of the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocols (“the European Convention”) – and more particularly of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights – when interpreting and applying codes of criminal procedure and comparable or related legislation. It does so by providing extracts from key rulings of the European Court and the former European Commission of Human Rights that have determined applications complaining about one or more violations of the European Convention in the course of the investigation, prosecution and trial of alleged offences, as well as in the course of appellate and various other proceedings linked to the criminal process.

The 'Europeanisation' of the fight against crime is a broad and much-contested notion. This in-depth analysis of the role of the EU in fighting crime within the area of freedom, security and justice explores the impact of EU policies in the Member States, the progressive convergence of Member States' criminal law systems, the emergence of mutual recognition as an alternative to harmonization, and the incremental development of the ECJ's jurisdiction. The essays also explore the limitations inherent in EU counter-crime policies and the changes brought about by the introduction of the Treaty of Lisbon. These changes are discussed both collectively and within individual substantive areas in which the EU has taken an active role in fighting crime, such as corruption, money laundering, terrorism, organised crime and extradition.