Right to Effective Legal Remedy in Criminal Proceedings in the EU. Implementation and Need for Standards
Paweł Wiliński
Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznań , Polandhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3798-7879
Karolina Kiejnich-Kruk
Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznań , Polandhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1551-5448
Abstract
In order to secure rights and guarantees provided by the legal system of the European Union, legal acts in the field of the criminal cooperation refer to the right to an effective remedy. Given that, two instruments are particularly important as they were the first to aim to set the standard and frame for the effective remedy conceptual framework: the Directive 2013/48/EU and the Directive (EU) 2016/343. The Authors analyse the legislation process within that context, the approach of Member States, (non)existing standards and related consequences, such as the possibilities of proper implementation of the right to the effective remedy into the national legal systems, verification of that process as well as the chances to achieve the harmonisation of minimal standards of the protection of fundamental rights in the area of criminal proceedings in the EU.
Keywords:
directive 2013/48, directive 2016/343, effective remedies, standardisation, implementationReferences
Auke, Willems. The Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law. Oxford et al.: Hart, 2021. (Crossref)
Barkhuysen, Tom, and Michiel L. van Emmerik. “Chapter 32: Right to an Effective Remedy.” In Theory and Practice of the European Convention of Human Rights, edited by Pieter Van Dijk, Fried van Hoof, Arjen van Rijn, and Leo Zwaak, 1035–1061. Cambridge-Antwerp-Portland: Intersentia, 2018.
Biral, Marianna, Isadora Neroni Rezende, Giulia Lasagni, Emanuele Gatto, Alessandra Santangelo, Irene Milazzo, Laura Bartoli, Antonio Pugliese, and Vanessa Maraldi, The Italian Implementation of the EU Directives on Pro-cedural Safeguards for Accused Persons in Criminal Proceedings. Accessed September 25, 2023. https://sistemapenale.it/pdf_contenuti/1669131660_re¬port-italiano-crossjustice.pdf.
Caianiello, Michele, and Giulia Lasagni. “Comparative Remarks.” In Effective Protection of the Rights of the Accused in the EU Directives, edited by Giu¬seppe Contissa, Giulia Lasagni, Michele Caianiello, and Giovanni Sartor, 229–258. Leiden: Brill Nijhof, 2022. (Crossref)
Cras, Steven, and Anže Erbežnik. “The Directive on the Presumption of Inno¬cence and the Right to Be Present at Trial.” Eucrim, no. 1 (2016): 25–36. (Crossref)
De Bondt, Wendy, and Gert Vermeulen. “The Procedural Debate. A Bridge Too Far or Still Not Far Enough?.” Eucrim, no. 4 (2010): 163–167.
Efrat, Asif. “Assessing Mutual Trust among EU Members: Evidence from Eu¬ropean Arrest Warrant.” Journal of European Public Policy, no. 26 (2019): 656–675. (Crossref)
Gora, Anna, and Pieter de Vilde. “The Essence of Democratic Backsliding in the European Union: Deliberation and Rule of Law.” Journal of European Public Policy 29, no. 3 (2022): 342–362. (Crossref)
Gutman, Kathleen. “The Essence of the Fundamental Right to an Effective Rem¬edy and to a Fair Trial in the Case-Law of the Court of Justice of the Euro¬pean Union: The Best Is Yet to Come?.” German Law Journal 20, no. 6 (2019): 884–903. (Crossref)
Hofmann, Herwig. “The Right to an Effective Remedy and to a Fair Trial – Ar¬ticle 47 of the Charter and the Member States.” In The Charter of Fundamen¬tal Rights of the European Union, edited by Steve Peers and Tamara Harvey. Oxford: Hart Bloomsberg, 2019.
Kiejnich, Karolina. “Harmonisation of EU Criminal Law – Issues of Implement¬ing EU Directives.” In European Union and Its Values: Freedom, Solidarity, Democracy, edited by Agnieszka Kłos, Jan Misiuna, Marta Pachocka, and Aleksandra Szczerba-Zawada, 31–39. Warsaw: CeDeWu, 2020.
Kiejnich-Kruk, Karolina. Prawo do skutecznego środka naprawczego w postępowaniu dowodowym. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2023.
Kusak, Martyna. Mutual Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Matters in the EU. A Study of Telephone Tapping and House Search. Antwerpen: Maklu Publish¬ers, 2016.
Lööf, Robin. “Shooting from the Hip: Proposed Minimum Rights in Criminal Proceedings throughout the EU.” European Law Journal 12, no. 3 (2006): 421–430. (Crossref)
Marguery, Tony. “European Union Fundamental Rights and Member States Ac¬tion in EU Criminal Law.” Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 20, no. 2 (2013): 282–301. (Crossref)
Montaldo, Stefano. “Intersections among EU Judicial Cooperation Instruments and the Quest for an Advanced and Consistent European Judicial Space: The Case of the Transfer and Surrender of Convicts in the EU.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 13, no. 3 (2022): 252–269. (Crossref)
Ouwerkerk, Jannemieke, Judit Altena, Jacob Öberg, and Samuli Miettinen, eds. The Future of EU Criminal Justice Policy and Practice. Legal and Crimi¬nological Perspectives. Brill: Nijhoff, 2019. (Crossref)
Paraskeva, Costas, Nikitas Hatzimihail, and Eleni Meleagrou. “General Report: Comparative Analysis of the Legal Treatment of the Right to be Present and the Presumption of Innocence in the PRESENT partner States in the light of Directive 2016/343.” Lex Localis, (2020): 129–159. (Crossref)
Pérez, Cristina Sáenz. “What about Fundamental Rights? Security and Funda¬mental Rights in the Midst of a Rule of Law Breakdown.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 13, no. 4 (2022): 526–545. (Crossref)
Pivaty, Anna, Ashlee Beazley, Yvonne M. Daly, Dorris de Vocht, and Peggy ter Vrugt. “Strengthening the Protection of the Right to Remain Silent at the Investigative Stage: What Role for the EU Legislator?” New Journal of Euro¬pean Criminal Law 12, no. 3 (2021): 427–448. (Crossref)
Pivaty, Anna, Ashlee Beazly, Yvonne M Daly, Laura Beckers, Dorris de Vocht, and Peggy ter Vrugt. “Opening Pandora’s Box: The Right to Silence in Po¬lice Interrogations and the Directive 2016/343/EU.” New Journal of Euro¬pean Criminal Law 12, no. 3 (2021): 328–346. (Crossref)
Prechal, Sacha. Directives in EC Law. New York: OUP Oxford, 2005.
Riehle, Cornelia, and Allison Clozel. “10 Years after the Roadmap: Procedural Rights in Criminal Proceedings in the EU Today.” ERA Forum 20, (2020): 321–325. (Crossref)
Ruggeri, Stefano. “Inaudito reo Proceedings, Defence Rights, and Harmonisation Goals in the EU.” Eucrim, no. 1 (2016): 42–51.
Schomburg, Wolfgang, Anna Oehmichen, and Katrin Kays. “Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 12, no. 2 (2021): 246–256. (Crossref)
Sellier, Élodie, and Anne Weyembergh, eds. Criminal Procedures and Cross-Border Cooperation in the EU Area of Criminal Justice. Together but Apart?. Bruxelles: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 2020. (Crossref)
Soo, Anneli. “(Effective) Remedies for a Violation of the Right to Counsel during Criminal Proceedings in the European Union: An Empirical Study.” Utrecht Law Review 14, no. 1 (2018): 18–60. (Crossref)
Van Dijk, Pieter, Fried van Hoof, Arjen van Rijn, and Leo Zwaak Leo, eds. Theory and Practice of the European Convention of Human Rights. Cambridge-Ant¬werp-Portland: Intersentia, 2018.
van Puyenbroeck, Laurens, and Gert Vermeulen. “Towards Minimum Procedur¬al Guarantees for the Defence in Criminal Proceedings in the EU.” Interna¬tional and Comparative Law Quarterly 60, no. 4 (2011): 1017–1038. (Crossref)
Wieczorek, Irene. The Legitimacy of EU Criminal Law. Oxford et al.: Hart, 2020. (Crossref)
Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznań https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1551-5448
