Affiliation:
1. Professor, Mykolas Romeris University, Faculty of Law ( Lithuania )
Abstract
Abstract
The issue of international cooperation in criminal matters has interested legal theorists and practitioners for decades. In this area of law there are certain challenges that can only be tackled by using the joint efforts of the States, which is different from the national law of the States. For this reason, certain principles of law are specific for international cooperation, and on the basis of these principles States provide legal assistance requests to each other or else create preconditions to ensure the efficient and unimpeded criminal proceedings. It is true that the principles of mutual legal assistance and recognition, and the influence of their alternation are not identical to all segments of international cooperation, including the development of the evidence law in the European Union.
With regard to the evidence and their admissibility in Member States of the European Union, it should be noted that this issue is still relevant, because the biggest concern of some Member States is the admissibility of evidence, when evidence is collected in one State and the admissibility of them is assessed in the other State. It would seem like a more formalized “concern”, but basically it is a quite significant impulse for searching of new legal instruments in the European Union, which would be able not only ensure the acceptability (admissibility) of evidence that was collected in the foreign State in accordance with the relevant procedural form, and in the court of the State which obtained this evidence, but also the sovereignty of the State, the authenticity of the national law, and the respect for the legal culture and traditions of this State.
The authors discuss the development of the law of evidence, the separate legal segments of this law, and their strengths and weaknesses in the article. Despite the fact that the effective mechanisms of evidence movement among Member States appear in modern European Union criminal justice, the latest legal instruments lack the clarity and certainty of certain procedural legal guarantees in the context of human rights protection.
Subject
Law,Sociology and Political Science
Reference38 articles.
1. 1. Bachmaier Winter, Lorena. “European Investigation Order for obtaining evidence in the criminal proceedings. Study of the proposal for European Directive.” Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik – www.zis-online.com (2010): 580–589.
2. 2. Belfiore, Rosanna. “Movement of Evidence in the EU: The Present Scenario and Possible Future Developments.” European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 17(2009): 1–22.
3. 3. Farries, Anthony. “The European Investigation Order: stepping forward with care.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 1 (2010): 425–432.
4. 4. Gless, Sabine. “Free Movement of Evidence in Europe.” El derecho procesal penal en la Unión Europea: tendencijas actuales y perspectivas de futuro // http://ius.unibas.ch/uploads/publics/5868/20100913144618_4c8e1d1af2837.pdf.
5. 5. González, Joaquín González-Herrero, and Maria Madalina Butincu. “The Collection of Evidence by OLAF and Its Transmission to the National Judicial Authorities.” The European Criminal Law Association‘s Forum (EUCRIM) 3 (2009): 90–94.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献