Mutual recognition and the European Court of Justice: The meaning of consistent interpretation and autonomous and uniform interpretation of Union law for the development of the principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters
Since the Tampere European Council, now ten years ago, hard work has been done within the third pillar of the European Union (EU) on innovation or, rather, streamlining of the legal assistance relationships between the Member States. This process is being completed along two lines. First of all, the traditional legal assistance system, in which States render legal assistance on request, has been transformed into a system of mutual recognition. The idea behind the principle of mutual recognition is that the European Member States are to a great extent required to render assistance to one another. This means that – ideally – few or no grounds for refusal may exist. This is partly intended to allow the necessary procedures to be standardised and run quickly. The second innovation is closely connected with this: within the EU, legal assistance is arranged mainly by means of framework decisions. A framework decision – in view of its definition in Article 34(2)(b) of the EU Treaty – gives rise to the obligation for the Member States to adjust their national legislation in accordance with the contents of the framework decision. Cooperation between the Member States based on the principle of mutual recognition is realised primarily through harmonisation of legislation. Since the Tampere European Council, now ten years ago, hard work has been done within the third pillar of the European Union (EU) on innovation or, rather, streamlining of the legal assistance relationships between the Member States. This process is being completed along two lines. First of all, the traditional legal assistance system, in which States render legal assistance on request, has been transformed into a system of mutual recognition. The idea behind the principle of mutual recognition is that the European Member States are to a great extent required to render assistance to one another. This means that – ideally – few or no grounds for refusal may exist. This is partly intended to allow the necessary procedures to be standardised and run quickly. The second innovation is closely connected with this: within the EU, legal assistance is arranged mainly by means of framework decisions. A framework decision – in view of its definition in Article 34(2)(b) of the EU Treaty – gives rise to the obligation for the Member States to adjust their national legislation in accordance with the contents of the framework decision. Cooperation between the Member States based on the principle of mutual recognition is realised primarily through harmonisation of legislation.
Journal/Publisher: European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminology, Volume 18, Issue 2
Publication type: Article
Number of pages/Page range: 99-114
Language/s (content): English
Date of publication: 04-01-10
Personal data
Full name Matthias J. BORGERS
Current occupation Member
University/Institution VU University Amsterdam
Address De Boelelaan 1105
Postal code 1081 HV
Telephone 0031 20 5986231
Fax 0031 20 5986230