Affiliation:
1. 1 Polish Academy of Sciences , Poland
Abstract
Abstract
This article analyses the limits to Member States’ powers in the field of enforcing (criminal) penalties for infringements of EU law, with particular focus on the protection of the EU’s financial interests. The article addresses the issue of the broad interpretation of the concept of ‘fraud’ within the meaning of Article 1(1) of the PFI Convention, which resulted in imposing an obligation on Member States to establish criminal penalties for certain serious VAT fraud. Next, the article analyses the requirements of effectiveness and equivalence of penalties established in domestic law for infringements of EU law, which may affect not only the severity of penalties, but also the rules of criminal procedure (limitation periods in pre-trial and judicial proceedings). Finally, the article presents the main developments in the context of limitations of ius puniendi, which stem from the obligation to protect fundamental rights under the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Reference21 articles.
1. Baranowski K., Ograniczenie stosowania zasady ne bis in idem na podstawie art. 52 ust. 1 Karty praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej. Glosa do wyroku TS z dnia 20 marca 2018 r., C-524/15, ‘Europejski Przegląd Sądowy’ 2020, no. 2, pp. 33–46.
2. Bonelli M., The Taricco Saga and the Consolidation of Judicial Dialogue in the European Union, ‘Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law’ 2018, no. 3, pp. 357–373.
3. Dougan M., From Velvet Glove to the Iron Fist: Criminal Sanctions for the Enforcement of Union Law, (in:) M. Cremona (ed.), Compliance and Enforcement of EU Law, Oxford 2012, pp. 74–131.
4. Gil Ibanez A.J., The Administrative Supervision and Enforcement of EC Law: Powers, Procedures and Limits, Oxford/Portland 1999.
5. Hancox E., The Meaning of ‘Implementing’ EU Law under Article 51(1) of the Charter: Åkerberg Fransson, ‘Common Market Law Review’ 2013, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1411–1431.