Home / Summaries / Week 1 / eu-agreement-national

Limits to investigation

5 important questions on Limits to investigation

What is in the EU agreement mutual assistance judical matters 2000?

EU agreement mutual assistance judicial matters 2000
First one is the agreement, agreement sounds alittle non commitment, but it is synonym for a treaty. the idea was bottlenecks, there are in practice where things go wrong, we have to get rid of those. Agreement (3dr pillar treaty) it took years to negotiate this treaty 8 years. Even after that it took years to get it ratified. In 2005 they started to applying it. Real policy this was not the right way.

What is the eu freezing ordeR?

.Avoiding destruction or disappearance
Framework Decision which MS had to implement
Based on principle of Mutual Recognition of judicial decisions from one MS by other MS
Less procedures, conditions than CoE
No double criminality check
“Judicialised” (not governments)

EU investigation order?

.Integration: avoid different regimes for different investigative actions
Check conditions, types of crime, grounds refusal, authority to decide,… (!!!)
Which law requesting/requested (not) applied while gathering evidence?
Transposition in MS law by May 2017
=> Now main instrument intra-EU cooperation

JIT JOINED INVESTIGATION TEAM what do they do?

.Work outside of MA regimes
Get info from national partners as one would along national rules (access to national database, files, sources,…)
No need to use burdensome international mutual assistance tools
Can easily be used in criminal procedure
Under EU Convention MA 2000 (and – at the time -a EU decision pending ratification of that Convention)
Under 2nd additional protocol to CoE Convention on MA 2001
Europol + Eurojust expertise/support:
Informal network national JIT-specialists/ Handbooks for JIT

Rowe and davis vs. Uk

2 man get violatly robbed one of the victims died. They commited another robbery. The wittnesses were inconsistent violation of art.1 and 3. Evidence is disclosed.applicnts said it was needed to have counterbalances. Equality of arms is very important.

it is not the role of the court to decide. If it was neccesary are there safeguards to protect accused.
a procedure where the prosecutor decides can not comply. The nature of the evidence wasnt revealed. The appeal as not enough remedy for the unfairness caused by the trail.

The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:

Week 1

View summary