The European Investigation Order
BOOK
Cite BOOK
Style
Ambos, K., Heinze, A., Rackow, P., Šepec, M. (Eds.) (2023). The European Investigation Order. Legal Analysis and Practical Dilemmas of International Cooperation. Duncker & Humblot. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-58708-7
Ambos, Kai; Heinze, Alexander; Rackow, Peter and Šepec, Miha. The European Investigation Order: Legal Analysis and Practical Dilemmas of International Cooperation. Duncker & Humblot, 2023. Book. https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-58708-7
Ambos, K, Heinze, A, Rackow, P, Šepec, M (eds.) (2023): The European Investigation Order: Legal Analysis and Practical Dilemmas of International Cooperation, Duncker & Humblot, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-58708-7
Format
The European Investigation Order
Legal Analysis and Practical Dilemmas of International Cooperation
Editors: Ambos, Kai | Heinze, Alexander | Rackow, Peter | Šepec, Miha
(2023)
Additional Information
Book Details
Pricing
About The Author
Peter Rackow ist seit 2018 außerplanmäßiger Professor an der Juristischen Fakultät der Georg-August-Universität (Göttingen) und seit 2021 Geschäftsführer des Göttinger Vereins zur Förderung der Strafrechtswissenschaft und Kriminologie sowie ihrer praktischen Anwendung e.V. Nach seiner Habilitation (2007) lehrte er ab 2010 an der Deutschen Hochschule der Polizei (Münster-Hiltrup) und war ab 2013 als Anwalt tätig, insbesondere im Bereich des Verkehrsrechts. Er ist langjähriges Mitglied des Landsjustizprüfungsamts Celle. Seine Forschungstätigkeit bezieht sich insbesondere auf den Bereich der Straftaten gegen die öffentliche Ordnung.Miha Šepec, associate professor of criminal law, graduated in 2010 at the Faculty of Law of University of Ljubljana and later in 2015 finished his PhD in criminal law field at Faculty of Law of University of Maribor. He has published more than 150 works in the field of criminal law, international and constitutional law. His specialization is cybercrime, criminal law theory, criminal process, media law, and criminal constitutional doctrine. He is the single author of a scientific monography Cybercrime: Criminal Offences and Criminal Law Analysis, editor and leading author of the Commentary of the Slovenian Criminal Code and one of the authors of the Commentary of the Slovenian Constitution.Abstract
This book is the last and final part of the project ›European Investigation Order - legal analysis and practical dilemmas of international cooperation - EIO-LAPD‹ in the EU Justice Programme. It presents a contribution to the European-wide discourse on how to enhance the effectiveness and the practical implementation of the Directive 2014/41/EU on the European Investigation Order in Criminal Matters of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 (EIO). Through national reports (Part I), the analysis of selected topics (Part II), and shorter case comments (Part III), the book’s objective is to equip target groups with specialised knowledge about the cross-border evidence gathering procedure described in the Directive 2014/41/EU. Unlike other parts of the project, this monograph is targeted at the legal community, students of law, NGOs and the interested public. Its goal is to achieve a greater inclusion of dilemmas connected with the practical application of the Directive into the legal and public discourse.This book is the last and final part of the project ›European Investigation Order - legal analysis and practical dilemmas of international cooperation - EIO-LAPD‹ in the EU Justice Programme. It presents a contribution to the European-wide discourse on how to enhance the effectiveness and the practical implementation of the Directive 2014/41/EU on the European Investigation Order in Criminal Matters of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 (EIO). Through national reports (Part I), the analysis of selected topics (Part II), and shorter case comments (Part III), the book’s objective is to equip target groups with specialised knowledge about the cross-border evidence gathering procedure described in the Directive 2014/41/EU. Unlike other parts of the project, this monograph is targeted at the legal community, students of law, NGOs and the interested public. Its goal is to achieve a greater inclusion of dilemmas connected with the practical application of the Directive into the legal and public discourse.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preface | 5 | ||
| Table of Contents | 7 | ||
| List of Abbreviations | 9 | ||
| Introduction | 13 | ||
| Part I: National Reports | 17 | ||
| By Charlotte Genschel, Lara Schalk-Unger and Nikolina Kulundzija: The European Investigation Order – National Report Austria | 19 | ||
| I. Transposition of the Directive into Austrian Domestic Law | 19 | ||
| II. A Digest of Austrian Transposition Laws | 21 | ||
| 1. Issuing Authorities | 21 | ||
| 2. Executing Authorities | 21 | ||
| 3. System of Validation | 22 | ||
| 4. EIOs that Require a Court Order | 22 | ||
| 5. Procedure if the Requested Investigation Measure is not Provided for by Austrian Law | 23 | ||
| 6. The Principle of Proportionality in Austrian Criminal Law | 23 | ||
| 7. Grounds for Rejection of an EIO under Austrian Law | 24 | ||
| 8. Objections to Measures Ordered by an EIO | 25 | ||
| III. The EIO in practice | 26 | ||
| 1. The Practical Experience with Non-Recognition/ Non-Execution Grounds | 26 | ||
| 2. Practical Problems with the EIO Form | 27 | ||
| 3. Experiences with the Time Frame | 27 | ||
| 4. Specificities Regarding Digital Evidence in Practice | 28 | ||
| IV. Summary | 28 | ||
| By Elizabeta Ivičević Karas, Zoran Burić, Marin Bonačić and Aleksandar Maravelski: European Investigation Order in Croatia – Normative Framework and Practical Challenges | 29 | ||
| I. Introduction | 29 | ||
| II. Croatia as the Issuing State | 32 | ||
| 1. Scope of Application | 32 | ||
| 2. Issuing Authorities and Validation Procedure | 33 | ||
| 3. Principle of Proportionality as a Precondition to Issue an EIO | 35 | ||
| III. Croatia as the Executing State | 35 | ||
| 1. General Rules on Recognition and Execution and the Executing Authority | 35 | ||
| 2. Recourse to a Different Type of Investigative Measure | 36 | ||
| 3. Grounds for Non-Recognition and Non-Execution | 38 | ||
| IV. Cooperation Procedure | 41 | ||
| 1. Channels of Communication | 41 | ||
| 2. Language | 41 | ||
| 3. Formalities and Procedure | 42 | ||
| 4. Time Limits | 43 | ||
| V. Position of The Defence | 45 | ||
| 1. EIOs Issued by the Defence | 45 | ||
| 2. Legal Remedies | 47 | ||
| VI. Conclusion | 48 | ||
| By Kai Ambos, Peter Rackow and Alexander Heinze: The European Investigation Order – a German Perspective | 51 | ||
| I. Transposition of the Directive into German Domestic Law | 51 | ||
| II. The European Investigation Order in the German IRG | 52 | ||
| 1. Scope of Application | 52 | ||
| 2. Channels of Communication | 52 | ||
| 3. Issuing Authorities | 53 | ||
| 4. Executing Authorities | 54 | ||
| 5. Outgoing EIOs | 54 | ||
| 6. Incoming EIOs | 55 | ||
| a) Language | 55 | ||
| b) Time Limits | 56 | ||
| c) Court Orders | 56 | ||
| d) Fundamental Rights Clause/Proportionality | 58 | ||
| e) Implementation Of Grounds For Non-Recognition/Execution | 60 | ||
| f) Remedies | 64 | ||
| III. The EIO in Practice | 66 | ||
| 1. The EIO Form | 66 | ||
| 2. Time Frames | 67 | ||
| 3. Channels of Communication | 67 | ||
| 4. The Practical Experience with Non-Recognition/Non-Execution Grounds | 67 | ||
| 5. Remedies | 68 | ||
| IV. Conclusion | 68 | ||
| By Laura Scomparin, Valeria Ferraris, Andrea Cabiale, Caroline Peloso and Oscar Calavita: Abbreviated National Report – Italy | 69 | ||
| I. The Implementation of the Directive of the European Investigation Order in the Italian Legal System | 69 | ||
| II. The Active Procedure | 70 | ||
| III. The Passive Procedure | 70 | ||
| IV. Language; Timeframe and Modality of Transmissions of EIO | 72 | ||
| V. The Role of the Central Authority | 74 | ||
| VI. The Proportionality of the EIO | 75 | ||
| VII. Special Methods of Execution and Guaranteed Acts of Investigations | 76 | ||
| VIII. Case of Refusal of EIO | 77 | ||
| IX. European Investigation Order and Fundamental Rights | 80 | ||
| X. Role of the Defence and Rulings of the Italian Courts | 82 | ||
| By Mário Simões Barata, Ana Paula Guimarães and Daniela Serra Castilhos: The European Investigation Order in Portugal – Legal Analysis and Practical Dilemmas | 87 | ||
| I. Introduction | 87 | ||
| II. Transposition | 87 | ||
| 1. Drafting an EIO | 88 | ||
| 2. Transmission | 90 | ||
| 3. Recognition | 90 | ||
| 4. Execution | 92 | ||
| 5. Transfer | 93 | ||
| 6. Other Questions | 93 | ||
| III. Practical Dilemmas: Data from the Issuing and Executing Authorities | 94 | ||
| 1. Issuing an EIO | 94 | ||
| 2. Transmission | 96 | ||
| 3. Recognition | 96 | ||
| 4. Execution | 97 | ||
| 5. Transfer | 98 | ||
| 6. Other Question: Evidence And Legal Remedies | 99 | ||
| IV. Practical Dilemmas: Attorneys | 99 | ||
| 1. Issuing an EIO | 100 | ||
| 2. Recognition | 101 | ||
| 3. Execution | 101 | ||
| 4. Evidence | 102 | ||
| 5. Other Questions | 103 | ||
| V. Conclusion | 103 | ||
| By Miha Šepec, Tamara Dugar, Anže Erbežnik and Jan Stajnko: Legal Implementation and Practical Application of the EIO Directive in Slovenia | 105 | ||
| I. Introduction | 105 | ||
| II. Analysis of Legal Implementation of the EIO-Directive | 105 | ||
| III. Analysis of Practical Application of the EIO | 112 | ||
| 1. Data from Issuing and Executing Authorities | 113 | ||
| 2. Data from an Attorney | 120 | ||
| IV. Conclusion | 121 | ||
| By Miha Šepec, Tamara Dugar and Jan Stajnko: European Investigation Order – A Comparative Analysis of Practical and Legal Dilemmas | 123 | ||
| I. Introduction | 123 | ||
| II. Shortcomings of the EIO Form | 124 | ||
| III. Accepted Languages in Urgent Cases | 126 | ||
| IV. Transmission of EIOs and Electronic Evidence via (In-)Secure Communication Channels | 127 | ||
| V. Video Conference Tools | 129 | ||
| VI. Responding to Requests for Inexistent Measures | 130 | ||
| VII. The ne bis in idem Non-Recognition Ground | 131 | ||
| VIII. Coercive Measures | 132 | ||
| IX. Speciality Rule | 134 | ||
| X. Request for Issuing of EIOs by the Defence | 135 | ||
| XI. Conclusion | 136 | ||
| Part II: Special Topics | 139 | ||
| By Kai Ambos and Peter Rackow: Developments and Adaptations of the Principle of Mutual Recognition – Reflections on the Origins of the European Investigation Order with a View to a Practice-Oriented Understanding of the Mutual Recognition Principle | 141 | ||
| I. To Which Extent Does the European Investigation Order Really Rest on the Principle of Mutual Recognition? | 141 | ||
| II. Why Does the Mutual Recognition Principle Only Underpin the EIO in a Diluted Form? | 145 | ||
| 1. Structural and Doctrinal Perspective – Is the Principle of Mutual Recognition Viable (for Mutual Assistance Concerning Evidence)? | 146 | ||
| 2. The Level of German (Legal) Policy – A Lack of Trust in the Suitability of the Mutual Recognition Principle for the Field of Mutual Assistance in the Gathering of Evidence | 150 | ||
| a) The German Reaction to the EIO | 150 | ||
| b) The (Further) Negotiations and Their Outcome | 154 | ||
| III. What Are the Consequences of the Fact That the Principle of Mutual Recognition Only Forms the Basis of the EIO in a Watered-Down Form? | 156 | ||
| 1. Direct Practical Consequences | 156 | ||
| 2. Consequences for Legal Policy and Strategy | 160 | ||
| IV. What Remains? What Might the Future Hold? | 161 | ||
| By Laura Scomparin and Caroline Peloso: Defend Yourself, by Contesting: Considerations on the Relationship Between the Right of Defence and the Right to Contest in the European Investigation Order | 163 | ||
| I. Introduction: Legal Remedies and Fundamental Rights in the European Investigation Order | 163 | ||
| II. Legal Remedies in European Evidence Cooperation Tools | 165 | ||
| III. Issues Concerning the Equivalence of Legal Remedies and the Protection of Fundamental Rights in Court of Justice Case Law | 169 | ||
| IV. The Position of Defence and Victim in Relation to Legal Remedies in the European Investigation Order Matter | 171 | ||
| V. Final Remarks | 176 | ||
| By Caroline Peloso and Oscar Calavita: Interception of Telecommunications: Strengths and Weaknesses of the European Investigation Order Directive (2014/41/EU) | 179 | ||
| I. Introduction | 179 | ||
| II. The Regulations on Interception of Telecommunications in the EIO Directive: A Comparative Interpretation with the ˋOlder' Brussels Convention | 180 | ||
| 1. The Competent Requesting Authority | 182 | ||
| 2. The Requesting Procedure | 184 | ||
| 3. The Execution Procedure | 188 | ||
| III. The Notion of ˋInterception of Telecommunications' | 190 | ||
| 1. Interception of Telecommunications and Audio Surveillance | 191 | ||
| 2. The Use of the Trojan Horse | 193 | ||
| 3. Preventive Interception and Interception for Tracking Fugitives | 194 | ||
| 4. Collection of Traffic and Location Data | 195 | ||
| IV. Interceptive EIO and Fundamental Rights | 197 | ||
| V. Conclusions | 200 | ||
| By Miha Šepec and Lara Schalk-Unger: Special Part of EU Criminal Law: The Level of Harmonization of the Categories of Offences Listed in Annex D in EU Legislation and Across Selected Member States | 203 | ||
| I. Introduction | 203 | ||
| II. The Categories of Offences | 208 | ||
| 1. Offences Defined in EU Law | 208 | ||
| a) Trafficking in Human Beings | 208 | ||
| b) Sexual Exploitation of Children and Child Pornography | 209 | ||
| c) Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances | 209 | ||
| d) Fraud, Including That Affecting the Financial Interests of the European Union Within the Meaning of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the Protection of the European Communities' Financial Interests | 210 | ||
| e) Laundering of the Proceeds of a Crime | 211 | ||
| f) Environmental Crime, Including Illicit Trafficking in Endangered Animal Species and in Endangered Plant Species and Varieties | 212 | ||
| g) Facilitation of Unauthorised Entry and Residence | 212 | ||
| h) Illicit Trade in Human Organ and Tissue | 213 | ||
| i) Kidnapping, Illegal Restraint and Hostage-Taking | 213 | ||
| j) Illicit Trafficking in Hormonal Substances and Other Growth Promoters | 214 | ||
| k) Illicit Trafficking in Nuclear or Radioactive Materials | 215 | ||
| 2. Offences Not Clearly Defined in EU Law | 215 | ||
| a) Illicit Trafficking in Weapons, Munitions and Explosives | 215 | ||
| b) Computer-Related Crime | 217 | ||
| c) Murder, Grievous Bodily Injury | 218 | ||
| d) Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Goods, Including Antiques and Works of Art | 218 | ||
| e) Swindling | 220 | ||
| f) Counterfeiting and Piracy of Products | 221 | ||
| g) Trafficking in Stolen Vehicles | 221 | ||
| h) Arson | 222 | ||
| i) Sabotage | 222 | ||
| III. Conclusion | 223 | ||
| By Laura Scomparin and Andrea Cabiale: The Principle of Proportionality in Directive 2014/41/EU – Challenges of the Present and Opportunities for the Future | 225 | ||
| I. Introduction | 225 | ||
| II. The Principle of Proportionality in General Theory and in ECtHR Case Law | 225 | ||
| III. The Principle of Proportionality in the EU Context | 229 | ||
| IV. Necessity and Proportionality in EIO Directive | 232 | ||
| V. The Duties of the Issuing and Executing Authority | 235 | ||
| VI. The Lack of Proportionality and its Consequences | 238 | ||
| VII. Concluding Remarks | 240 | ||
| By Anže Erbežnik and Marin Bonačić: European Investigation Order, E-Evidence and the Future of Cross-Border Cooperation in the EU | 243 | ||
| I. Introduction | 243 | ||
| II. The Adoption of the EIO and the Main Points of Discussion Between the Two Legislators | 245 | ||
| 1. The Notion of ˋJudicial Authority' | 246 | ||
| 2. A Fundamental Rights Non-Recognition Clause | 247 | ||
| 3. (Non-)Coercive Measures | 250 | ||
| III. E-Evidence Proposal and its Pitfalls | 251 | ||
| IV. A Harmonised Approach to Admissibility of Evidence and Data Retention as Cornerstones for a Functioning EU Evidence and E-Evidence System | 255 | ||
| 1. Admissibility of Evidence and the Exclusionary Rule | 255 | ||
| 2. Data Retention | 258 | ||
| V. Conclusions | 262 | ||
| Part III: Short Comments | 263 | ||
| By Jan Stajnko, Mário Simões Barata and István Szijártó : Comments re Gavanozov I and Gavanozov II | 265 | ||
| I. Jan Stajnko and Mário Simões Barata: A New CJEU Decision Regarding the EIO Form | 265 | ||
| II. Mário Simões Barata and Jan Stajnko: The Fundamental Rights Objections | 266 | ||
| III. Szijártó István: Considerations Regarding the Gavanozov II Case Before the CJEU | 267 | ||
| By Peter Rackow, Elizabeta Ivičević Karas, Zoran Burić, Marin Bonačić and Aleksandar Maravelski: Comments re Parquet de Lübeck | 271 | ||
| I. Peter Rackow: General Advocate's Opinion on the Eligibility of Prosecutors to Issue European Investigation Orders (C-584/19) | 271 | ||
| II. Peter Rackow: ECJ Grand Chamber Judgment on the Eligibility of Prosecutors to Issue European Investigation Orders (C-584/19) | 273 | ||
| III. Elizabeta Ivičević Karas, Zoran Burić, Marin Bonačić and Aleksandar Maravelski: The Effects of the ECJ Parquet de Lübeck Judgement on Croatian Criminal Justice System | 274 | ||
| List of Editors | 277 | ||
| List of Authors | 279 | ||
| Subject Index | 283 |