Full Description
This edited volume is based on the European Law Institute's project, 'The Prevention and Resolution of Conflicts of Exercise of Jurisdiction in Criminal Law', co-ordinated by the European Law Institute (ELI) and the University of Luxembourg. The project ran from 2013 to 2017 and was conducted under the auspices of the ELI and the Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR). The study sought to explore options for a coherent regulatory mechanism for the prevention and settlement of conflicts of jurisdiction in criminal law. Currently, there is no binding instrument establishing a mechanism to resolve conflicts of (exercising) jurisdiction in criminal matters in the EU, although such a mechanism is essential for the effective functioning of a European criminal justice area based on mutual recognition. Building on empirical research and a comparison with civil law solutions to the problem of conflicts of jurisdiction, this volume seeks to impact the EU policy debate by proposing three fully-formed models for legislative action, coupled with extensive analysis of related themes.
Contents
PART I: A European Law Institute InstrumentKatalin Ligeti, John Vervaele and André Klip (ELI Reporters):
Frank Meyer: Preface to Part I
Draft Legislative Proposals for the prevention and resolution of conflicts of jurisdiction in criminal matters in the European Union
PART II: Preventing and Resolving Conflicts of Jurisdiction in EU Criminal LawEdited by Katalin Ligeti and Gavin Robinson:
Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque: Preface to Part II
Katalin Ligeti and Gavin Robinson: Introduction to the Articles
1: Angelo Marletta: Report on the Field Research at Eurojust, February 2015
2: Martin Wasmeier: The legal basis for preventing and resolving conflicts of criminal jurisdiction in the TFEU
3: Miguel Carmona Ruano: Prevention and settlement of conflicts of jurisdiction (Spanish system)
4: Angelo Marletta: Forum choice in the area of freedom, security and justice
5: Katalin Ligeti: Fundamental rights protection between Strasbourg and Luxembourg: Extending transnational ne bis in idem across administrative and criminal procedures
6: Gavin Robinson: Choice of forum and cybercrime
7: Pietro Ortolani: Conflicts of jurisdiction in criminal law: Lessons from European civil procedure
8: Aukje van Hoek: Mutual recognition, choice of forum, and lis pendens: A civil law threesome transposed
9: Michiel Luchtman: Choice of forum, European citizenship, and fundamental rights: The position of the defendant
10: Michele Simonato: What role for crime victims in the forum choice?
11: Hans- Holger Herrnfeld: Choice of forum and case allocation in the EPPO Regulation
