CRPE Policy Brief no. 46, August 2020. The efficiency of judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU. Authors: Bianca Toma, Alexandru Damian
How judicial cooperation between the EU Member States works
A case study in which we discuss extensively how Romania, Italy and Spain apply the same three EU framework decisions related to the sentences of those convicted in other countries or alternative measures that apply to them.
CRPE provides a case study in which we discuss extensively how Romania, Italy, and Spain put into practice the same three EU framework decisions related to the sentences of those convicted in other countries or alternative measures that apply to them.
The report shows the conclusions of the analyzes on three European legislative instruments, namely Framework Decision 829/2008 on the European Supervision Order, Framework Decision 947/2008 on probation measures and alternative sanctions, and Framework Decision 909/2008 on the transfer of prisoners. The report focuses mainly on the first two framework decisions, but it also includes the Framework Decision 909/2008 as a case study to provide an in-depth understanding of how judicial cooperation between the three Member States has evolved in recent years.
The EU also took concrete actions to ensure that non-residents involved in criminal investigations in other countries receive the same treatment as residents when consolidating European legislation for the application of the European arrest warrant. That is why not only the custodial sentence is recognized, but also alternative measures, including the supervision order.
in the last three years, the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE), together with the University of Turin, Amapola Progetti (Italy), the Italian Ministry of Justice and the University A Coruña (Spain), aim at analyzing how the three Framework Decisions work in practice. Together with practitioners, magistrates, and experts in judicial cooperation, the consortium sought to reveal what the limitations are, both in terms of intra-state and national cooperation, what obstacles face the magistrates in the proper use of these instruments, but also a set of proposals for improving the practical framework in the implementation of the framework decisions.
There is limited use of these legislative instruments twelve years after their launch even between countries with intensive cooperation and a significant number of resident or non-resident foreign nationals (Romania – Italy and Romania – Spain cases with a population over one million Romanians in each of the other two Member States). As the principle of mutual recognition is essential for the so-called common justice area, it is easy to understand that the mutual/synchronized transposition of legislative instruments is important and provides the level of efficiency of cooperation among the Member States.
Full report, in English, is available here.