Public Law Studies Quarterly

Challenges and Oppositions of European Union’s and Member States’ Competences in Police and Criminal Matters Related to the Area of Freedom Security and Justice of the European Union

Authors

Ahmad Momenirad 1
Farhad Bagheri 2

1 Assistant Professor, Public Law Department, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. student in international law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Iran, Tehran

https://doi.org/10.22059/jplsq.2017.214871.1339
Abstract
After the treaty of Lisbon, the structure of the pillars of the European Union was abandoned. European community emerged into European Union and the single institutional framework was established. But the function of the other two pillars continues. One of the pillars is the police and judicial co- operation in criminal matters which merged into the area of freedom security and Justice of the EU. Structure of this area is intergovernmental. Police and criminal matters are interrelated to the communities of the member states’ public order. Thus, states has refrained to confer vast powers in this area upon the EU. While they have relinquished from huge content of their sovereignty and powers of their own in other policies and matters of EU and conferred them upon it. Criminal and police policies in EU aim to combat with impunity of criminals and escape from justice because of lenient legal systems of some member states, to protect people rights and even the criminals . Thus the EU has attempted to lay down minimum regulations, so as refrain from aggression to the states sovereignty as well as guaranteeing the EU objectives. This contribution intends to, in an analytic- descriptive manner, explore the interaction and opposition of EU’s and member states’ competences, and analyze the role of states’ sovereignty in minimum legislative acts, and shape readers’ thinking by offering a concise summary of ECJ practice,  structure, function and agencies of the Area of FSJ, and finally conclude that fundamental differences between definition of public order and opinions about sovereignty of states have been caused measures and decisions in this area, possess basis and minimum features.

Keywords

Criminal matters- member states- principle of conferral- principle of subsidiarity
الف) فارسی
خالقی، علی (1384). «دادگستری اروپایی (یوروجاست)»، مجلۀ پژوهش‌های حقوقی، دورۀ 4، شمارۀ 8.
ــــــــــــــــــــ (1384). «قرار جلب اروپایی و تأثیر آن بر حقوق استرداد مجرمین در اتحادیۀ اروپایی»، مجلۀ پژوهش‌های حقوقی، دورۀ 4، شمارۀ 7.
ــــــــــــــــــــ (1382). «یوروپل»، مجلۀ پژوهش‌های حقوقی، دورۀ 3، شمارۀ 3.
کدخدایی، عباس (1380). حقوق و ساختار اتحادیۀ اروپایی، نشر میزان.
محمد، آشوری (1393). حقوق کیفری شورای اروپایی، ترجمۀ، انتشارات خرسندی.
ب) انگلیسی
Andeans, Mads & Andersen, Camilla Baasch (2011). theory and practice of harmonization, Edwar Elgar publishing.
Elizabeth, Bomberg, Peterson, John (2008). the European Union: how does it work?, oxford university press.
Georges, Estievenart (1995). policy and strategies to combat drug in Europe, Martinus Nijhoff publisher.
Hinarejos, Alicia (2009). judicial control in the European Union, Oxford University press.
Kaczorowska, Alina (2009). European Union law, Routledge.
Lelieveldt, Herman (2015). the politics of EU, Cambridge university press.
Reinisch, august (2009). essential questions in EU law, Cambridge University press.
Vermeulen, Gert (2012). rethinking in international cooperation in criminal matters in EU, Maklu publisher.
Weatherill, Stephen (2006). case and materials on EU law, oxford university press.
Wessel, R.A., Curtin, D.M. (2005). good governance and European Union, Itersentina publisher.
Wetter, Anna (2009). enforcing European Union law on exports of dual use of good, oxford university press.
Woods, Lorna & Watson, Philippa (2012). Steiner and woods EU law, Oxford University press.
Great Britain parliament, House of Lords, European Union committee, the treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, (2008), vol. II: evidence. Part E.
www.eurojust.europe.eu.
www.europol.europa.eu.
Public Law Studies Quarterly
Volume 47, Issue 3
Autumn 2017
Pages 689-706

  • Receive Date 29 August 2016
  • Revise Date 26 December 2016
  • Accept Date 02 January 2017

Home

Journal Process Ethics

Peer Review Process

Submission

Indexing and Abstracting

Contact Us