Judicial cooperation in criminal matters between EU member states.

Abstract

One of the main features of the European economic area is the removal of internal borders between the member states. However criminal matters remain very much an exclusive competence of the member states. Thus in today's European political reality the existing form of judicial cooperation is not sufficient. The decision making processes are inefficient; policies agreed upon are often ineffective because they are not adequately implemented; there is excessive complexity of programs and cooperative arrangements; and the EU suffers from weak legitimacy in this area. It is important that this cooperation adapts to cater for the needs required to combat the ever-growing forms and internationalization of criminality. The Treaty of Amsterdam has provided a first step towards the necessary reinforcement of this cooperation. By enshrining in the Union's objectives, the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice, the Treaty of Amsterdam has encouraged a process of greater cooperation amongst the European states, which is difficult to be ignored. Besides the European Summit of Tampere in October 1999 has opened new perspectives for the creation of a European judicial criminal area. The events of 11 th September have helped take certain radical decisions quickly despite the inefficiency of the decision making process. European cooperation in this area is very often dependent on the relationship between the supranational and national institutions and the sharing of competencies between them. A relationship requires trust and mutual confidence as well as flexibility in order to obtain a degree of efficiency and cooperation. Several organs, including Eurojust, European Judicial Network, Liaison Magistrates, the European Commission's Anti-Fraud Office and Europol, have been set-up aimed at coordinating efforts to help coordinate investigation and prosecution of serious cross-border crime. Several instruments have been adopted, aimed at approximating definitions of crimes and penal sanctions in the areas identified by the Amsterdam Treaty and by the Tampere Conclusions. The principle of Mutual Recognition of Final and Pre-Trial Judgments as well as the establishment of a European Arrest Warrant are seen to be the greatest tools of cooperation in this field whereby the judicial authorities of the Member States assist one another with minimum validation procedures on the basis of mutual trust and confidence vis-a-vis the legal systems and protections of the other Member States. Very often progress in further cooperation in criminal matters is hindered by issues related to the protection of human rights. A case in point is certainly the introduction of the European Arrest Warrant. This Thesis raises a number of Human Rights issues as a consequence of the methods and results of cooperation between states. Analysis of what the EU is doing to ensure that it obtains a balance between the notion of freedom and security is also required. Enlargement will certainly expose the weaknesses of this system of cooperation more clearly. The increase in the number of legitimate national interests will render agreement on common policies more difficult. This calls, but at the same time offers the opportunity, to introduce necessary reforms. The presentation of this Thesis coincides with the presentation of the final draft of the European Constitution which in fact does incorporate several of the much called for changes. Yet our duty now is to concentrate on what further changes are required to continue improving cooperation in criminal matters especially where cross-border crimes are concerned. This thesis questions whether it is best to arrive to a unified system at least in respect of certain crimes.