The Europeanisation of extradition: how many light years away to mutual confidence?

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511751219.008

7 - The Europeanisation of extradition: how many light years away to mutual confidence?

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 June 2011

Theodore Konstadinides

Edited by

Christina Eckes and

Theodore Konstadinides

Show author details

Theodore Konstadinides: Affiliation:
University of Surrey
Christina Eckes: Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Theodore Konstadinides: Affiliation:
University of Surrey

Book contents

Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The objective set for the Union to become an aArea of Freedom, Security and Justice has led, amongst other things, to abolishing extradition between Member States and replacing it with a simplified system of ‘surrender between judicial authorities’. Following the September 2001 terrorist attacks in New York, and having considered the potential impact on the fight against crime and terrorism, the heads of State and Government of the European Union, the President of the European Parliament, the President of the European Commission, and the former High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy jointly called for a new system that would make it easier for justice to be administered across the EU through the enforced transfer of persons from one Member State to another. The draft legislative resolution on the Commission proposal for a Council Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) was adopted on 13 June 2002 by the Council, establishing a pan-European warrant for search, arrest, detention and surrender to the judicial authority of the issuing country. As a consequence, in 2004 the EAW gradually replaced extradition between Member States.

Undeniably, the Framework Decision on the EAW has added impetus to the EU counter-terrorism response, which since the terrorist bombings in Madrid (March 2004) and London (July 2005) has expanded incrementally through the adoption of a panoply of measures. At the time of writing, not only has the EAW been implemented by all the Member States but it is operational in most cases.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Crime within the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice
A European Public Order
, pp. 192 - 223

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511751219.008 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Maduro, M. P., We the Court: The European Court of Justice & The European Economic Constitution (Hart Publishing, 1997) 33 131–6Google Scholar

Safferling, C. J. M., Towards an International Criminal Procedure (Oxford University Press, 2001) 319–23)Google Scholar

Fletcher, M., ‘Some Developments to the ne bis in idem Principle in the European Union: Criminal Proceedings Against Hüseyn Gözütok and Klaus Brügge’ 66(5) Modern Law Review (2003) 769CrossRef Google Scholar

Vervaele, J. A. E., ‘The Transnational ne bis in idem Principle in the EU: Mutual Recognition and Equivalent Protection of Human Rights’ 1(2) Utrecht Law Review (2005) 100CrossRef Google Scholar

Wasmeier, M., ‘The Development of ne bis in idem into a Transnational Fundamental Right in EU Law: Comments on Recent Developments’ 31(4) European Law Review (2006) 565Google Scholar

Jimeno-Bulnes, M., ‘European Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters’ 9 European Law Journal (2003) 614CrossRef Google Scholar

Jimeno-Bulnes, M., ‘After September 11th: The Fight Against Terrorism in National and European Law. Substantive and Procedural Rules: Some Examples’ 10 European Law Journal (2004) 235CrossRef Google Scholar

Sliedregt, E. V., ‘The Principle of Dual Criminality and the European Arrest Warrant’, in N. Keijzer and E. V. Sliedregt (eds.), The European Arrest Warrant in Practice (Cambridge University Press, 2009)Google Scholar

Spencer, J. R., ‘The Drafting of Criminal Legislation: Need it be so Impenetrable?’ 67(3) Cambridge Law Journal, (2008) 593CrossRef Google Scholar

Blake, L. W., Sinnamon, T. and Pointing, J., ‘Over-regulation and Suing the State for Negligent Legislation’ Statute Law Review (2007) 1Google Scholar

Deen-Racsmány, Z. and Blekxtoon, R., ‘The Decline of the Nationality Exception in European Extradition? The Impact of the Regulation of (Non-) Surrender of Nationals and Dual Criminality under the European Arrest Warrant’ 13 European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice (2005) 317CrossRef Google Scholar

Plachta, M., ‘Recent Developments in the Extradition Law’ 2 Yearbook of Polish European Studies (1998) 109Google Scholar

Satzger, H., ‘The German Court and the European Arrest Warrant: “Cryptic Signals” from Karlsruhe’ 4(4) Journal of International Criminal Justice (2006) 686CrossRef Google Scholar

Konstadinides, T., ‘The Perils of the Europeanisation of Extradition Procedures in the EU: Mutuality, Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Guarantees’ 14 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (2007) 179CrossRef Google Scholar

Briza, P., ‘Lucchini SpA – Is there Anything Left of res judicata Principle?’ 27(1) Civil Justice Quarterly (2008) 40Google Scholar

Leczykiewicz, D., ‘Constitutional Conflicts and the Third Pillar’ 32(2) European Law Review (2008) 230Google Scholar

Hatzopoulos, V., ‘With or Without You … Judging Politically in the Field of Area of Freedom, Security and Justice’ 33(1) European Law Review (2008) 61Google Scholar

Hinajeros, A., ‘Recent Human Rights Developments in the EU Courts: The Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Arrest Warrrant and Terror Lists’ 7(4) Human Rights Law Review (2007) 793Google Scholar

Chatwin, C., ‘Drug Policy Developments within the European Union: The Destabilizing Effects of Dutch and Swedish Drug Policies’ 43 British Journal of Criminology (2003) 567CrossRef Google Scholar

Card, J. English and R., Police Law (9th edn, Oxford University Press, 2005)Google Scholar

Shuibhne, N. N., ‘Margins of Appreciation: National Values, Fundamental Rights and EC Free Movement Law’ 34(2) European Law Review (2009) 252Google Scholar

Vogel, J. and Spencer, J.R., ‘Proportionality and the European Arrest Warrant’ 6 Criminal Law Review (2010) 474Google Scholar

Davidson, R., ‘A Sledgehammer to Crack a Nut? Should There be a Bar of Triviality in European Arrest Warrant Cases?’ 1 Criminal Law Review (2009) 33Google Scholar

Alegre, S. and Leaf, M., ‘Judicial Cooperation: A Step too Far Too Soon? Case Study – The European Arrest Warrant’ 10(2) European Law Journal (2004) 201Google Scholar

Mitsilegas, V., ‘The Constitutional Implications of Mutual Recognition in Criminal Matters in the EU’ 43 Common Market Law Review (2006) 1280Google Scholar

Sliedregt, E., ‘The European Arrest Warrant: Between Trust, Democracy and the Rule of Law’ 3 European Constitutional Law Review (2007) 244CrossRef Google Scholar

Geyer, F., ‘Case Note: Advocaten voor de Wereld’ 4 European Constitutional Law Review (2008) 154Google Scholar

Herlin-Karnell, E., ‘In the Wake of Pupino: Advocaten voor der Wereld and Dell ’Orto' 8(12) German Law Journal (2007) 1148Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.