Jurisdiction Collisions in the Criminal Proceedings of European Union Member States

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Employing systematic document analysis and other methods, this article analyses a long-standing and still relevant issue related to the interpretation and application of the law regulating relationships in the field of European Union criminal justice within the framework of the national criminal proceedings that are taking place in EU member states. The article places special emphasis on the explanation and application of the principle of mutual recognition within the framework of one of the newest instruments of international cooperation in the European Union criminal proceedings meant to prevent conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction and to solve issues arising between two or more member states. The analysis of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction provided in this paper is not limited to a mere explanation of the concept as such, but includes an essential analysis of other related issues, such as the principle of mutual recognition, its influence on the recognition of criminal proceedings as parallel proceedings, and including other aspects related to the matching of the form of national criminal proceedings with the criminal proceedings taking place in another member state. Finally, significant attention is given to one of the objectives in terms of prevention and solution of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, namely, the ne bis in idem principle and its application in case of parallel criminal proceedings taking place in two or more member states. One of the key conclusions offered here is that in order to eliminate conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, positive law in the process of conflicts of jurisdiction must become an effective measure in criminal justice; however, only on the condition that at least a minimum likelihood in the form of criminal proceedings adopted by different EU members states is ensured as a precondition necessary to enable a smooth application of the principle of mutual recognition.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)82-105
Number of pages24
JournalBaltic Journal of Law and Politics
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2015

Fingerprint

criminal proceedings
jurisdiction
EU member state
interpretation of the law
justice
positive law
legal usage
document analysis
international cooperation

Keywords

  • collision
  • Criminal proceedings
  • jurisdiction
  • parallel proceedings
  • the principle of neb is in idem

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{cf338b6b8ba64674b707e6482147868c,
title = "Jurisdiction Collisions in the Criminal Proceedings of European Union Member States",
abstract = "Employing systematic document analysis and other methods, this article analyses a long-standing and still relevant issue related to the interpretation and application of the law regulating relationships in the field of European Union criminal justice within the framework of the national criminal proceedings that are taking place in EU member states. The article places special emphasis on the explanation and application of the principle of mutual recognition within the framework of one of the newest instruments of international cooperation in the European Union criminal proceedings meant to prevent conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction and to solve issues arising between two or more member states. The analysis of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction provided in this paper is not limited to a mere explanation of the concept as such, but includes an essential analysis of other related issues, such as the principle of mutual recognition, its influence on the recognition of criminal proceedings as parallel proceedings, and including other aspects related to the matching of the form of national criminal proceedings with the criminal proceedings taking place in another member state. Finally, significant attention is given to one of the objectives in terms of prevention and solution of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, namely, the ne bis in idem principle and its application in case of parallel criminal proceedings taking place in two or more member states. One of the key conclusions offered here is that in order to eliminate conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, positive law in the process of conflicts of jurisdiction must become an effective measure in criminal justice; however, only on the condition that at least a minimum likelihood in the form of criminal proceedings adopted by different EU members states is ensured as a precondition necessary to enable a smooth application of the principle of mutual recognition.",
keywords = "collision, Criminal proceedings, jurisdiction, parallel proceedings, the principle of neb is in idem",
author = "Raimundas Jurka and Jolanta Zajančkauskiene",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1515/bjlp-2015-0012",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "82--105",
journal = "Baltic Journal of Law and Politics",
issn = "2029-0454",
publisher = "Versita (Central European Science Publishers)",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Jurisdiction Collisions in the Criminal Proceedings of European Union Member States

AU - Jurka, Raimundas

AU - Zajančkauskiene, Jolanta

PY - 2015/6/1

Y1 - 2015/6/1

N2 - Employing systematic document analysis and other methods, this article analyses a long-standing and still relevant issue related to the interpretation and application of the law regulating relationships in the field of European Union criminal justice within the framework of the national criminal proceedings that are taking place in EU member states. The article places special emphasis on the explanation and application of the principle of mutual recognition within the framework of one of the newest instruments of international cooperation in the European Union criminal proceedings meant to prevent conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction and to solve issues arising between two or more member states. The analysis of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction provided in this paper is not limited to a mere explanation of the concept as such, but includes an essential analysis of other related issues, such as the principle of mutual recognition, its influence on the recognition of criminal proceedings as parallel proceedings, and including other aspects related to the matching of the form of national criminal proceedings with the criminal proceedings taking place in another member state. Finally, significant attention is given to one of the objectives in terms of prevention and solution of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, namely, the ne bis in idem principle and its application in case of parallel criminal proceedings taking place in two or more member states. One of the key conclusions offered here is that in order to eliminate conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, positive law in the process of conflicts of jurisdiction must become an effective measure in criminal justice; however, only on the condition that at least a minimum likelihood in the form of criminal proceedings adopted by different EU members states is ensured as a precondition necessary to enable a smooth application of the principle of mutual recognition.

AB - Employing systematic document analysis and other methods, this article analyses a long-standing and still relevant issue related to the interpretation and application of the law regulating relationships in the field of European Union criminal justice within the framework of the national criminal proceedings that are taking place in EU member states. The article places special emphasis on the explanation and application of the principle of mutual recognition within the framework of one of the newest instruments of international cooperation in the European Union criminal proceedings meant to prevent conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction and to solve issues arising between two or more member states. The analysis of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction provided in this paper is not limited to a mere explanation of the concept as such, but includes an essential analysis of other related issues, such as the principle of mutual recognition, its influence on the recognition of criminal proceedings as parallel proceedings, and including other aspects related to the matching of the form of national criminal proceedings with the criminal proceedings taking place in another member state. Finally, significant attention is given to one of the objectives in terms of prevention and solution of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, namely, the ne bis in idem principle and its application in case of parallel criminal proceedings taking place in two or more member states. One of the key conclusions offered here is that in order to eliminate conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction, positive law in the process of conflicts of jurisdiction must become an effective measure in criminal justice; however, only on the condition that at least a minimum likelihood in the form of criminal proceedings adopted by different EU members states is ensured as a precondition necessary to enable a smooth application of the principle of mutual recognition.

KW - collision

KW - Criminal proceedings

KW - jurisdiction

KW - parallel proceedings

KW - the principle of neb is in idem

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944038889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84944038889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1515/bjlp-2015-0012

DO - 10.1515/bjlp-2015-0012

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 82

EP - 105

JO - Baltic Journal of Law and Politics

JF - Baltic Journal of Law and Politics

SN - 2029-0454

IS - 1

ER -