EU Justice and Home Affairs Law

Constitutional Framework and Principles for Interpretation

“…98 These provisions in secondary legislation are generally understood to allow Member States to adopt rules in favour of third country nationals whose rights and duties are regulated by the directive in question, 99 although the precise scope of national discretion remains unclear. Both the new primary law framework of the Treaty of Lisbon and the aforementioned proviso concerning compatibility with the directive in question argue in favour of a cautious approach towards national deviations.…”

The European Court of Justice as a Game Changer: Fiduciary Obligations in the Area of 'Freedom, Security and Justice'

“…The purpose of the EAW was to speed up criminal law cooperation and to fight terrorism more effectively. In short, the EAW litigation saga started with an assumption that mutual trust was the prevailing condition for upholding the legality of the EAW (Rijken 2010;Peers 2015). Advocaten voor de Wereld (Case C-303/05) was the first test case of the validity of the EAW that was brought before the Court of Justice.…”

“…This lack of conceptualization has been considered a significant lacuna in EU criminal law cooperation. In this regard, there is currently insufficient mutual trust among the member states and no adequate European regime for the protection of human rights within the former third pillar to justify such an analogy with the internal market and mutual recognition (Peers 2015). The notion of trust has also played an important role in the civil law area (Storskrubb 2016).…”

“…The Treaty of Amsterdam of 1999 clarified the EU's objectives with regard to the fight against crime and the concept of an AFSJ was generated. While asylum matters, immigration and civil law cooperation were moved to Title IV of the former EC Treaty, criminal law cooperation and security remained the hallmark of the third-pillar regime under the Amsterdam Treaty (Peers 2015). However, as is often pointed out, the third pillar to a large extent excluded the Court of Justice from policing this area as its jurisdiction was based on a voluntary declaration of the member states.…”

Individual Rights and Transnational Networks

“…They can involve the enforcement of classic regulatory policies, such as transatlantic cooperation on antitrust enforcement (Piilola 2003, Whytock 2005. They can also entail intelligence exchange, designed to facilitate the detention and arrest of suspects, by law enforcement and national security offi cials through bilateral arrangements and multilateral frameworks such as Interpol (Savino 2009) and Europol (Peers 2008). And there are many other examples, too numerous to review here.…”