|
MAIN PAGE
> Back to contents
Law and Politics
Reference:
Gurbanov, R.A.
Evolution of the mechanisms of cooperation
of the judicial bodies of the member states
of the EU in the sphere of criminal justice.
// Law and Politics.
2011. № 8.
P. 1341-1352.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=51571
Gurbanov, R.A. Evolution of the mechanisms of cooperation
of the judicial bodies of the member states
of the EU in the sphere of criminal justice.
Abstract:
Mechanisms of cooperation of the justice bodies of the EU states have been subjected to suffi cient changes. Initially classic
cooperation was defi ned as cooperation of states in the sphere of criminal justice. Later on the cooperation included direct
cooperation of the justice bodies. Currently the cooperation among the justice bodies of the member states came to a new
level and includes partial integration of legal and judicial systems, so it is qualifi ed among the legal scholars as cooperation
based on mutual recognition of judicial decisions.
Keywords:
jurisprudence, the European law, mutual recognition of judicial decisions, justice bodies of the EU members, Directives, cadre solutions, convention law, advanced cooperation, classic (inter-government) cooperation, judicial law.
References
1. S. Alegre et M. Leaf, Mutual Recognition in European Judicial Cooperation: A step too far too soon? Case Study – The European Arrest Warrant, European Law Journal, n° 2004, p. 200 s.
2. R. Blekxtoon et W. van Ballegooij, Handbook on the European Arrest Warrant, The Hague, TMC Asser Press, 2005.
3. M.-E. Cartier, Le mandat d’arrêt européen, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2005.
4. S. Gless, Zum Prinzip der gegenseitigen Anerkennung, Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (ZStW), n° 2, 2004, p. 353 s.
5. H.-G. Nilsson, From Classical judicial cooperation to mutual recognition, RID pén. 2006, vol. 77, 1/2, p. 53 s
6. G. Vermeulen, T. Vander Beken, E. de Busser, A. Dormaels, Blueprint for an EU Criminal Records Database. Legal, politico-institutional & Practical Feasibility, Antwerpen-Apeldoorn, Maklu, 2002.
7. J. A. E. Vervaele, European Evidence Warrant. Transnational Judicial Enquiries in the EU, Antwerpen – Oxford, Intersentia, 2005.
8. M. Wasmeier, The principle of ne bis in idem, RID pén. 2006, vol. 77, 1/2, p. 121 s.
9. A. Weyembergh et S. de Biolley, The EU Mutual Legal Assistance convention of 2000 and the Interception of Telecommunications, European Journal of Law Reform 2006, vol. 8, n° 2/3, p. 285 s.
10. C. Williams, The European evidence warrant, RID pén. 2006, vol. 77, 1/2, p. 155 s.
11. J. Peers, Mutual Recognition and criminal law in the European Union: has the Council got it wrong?, Common Market Law Review, 2004, n° 41, p. 5 s.
12. N. Thwaites, Mutual trust in criminal matters: the European Court of Justice gives its fi rst interpretation of a provision of the convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, in German Law Journal, 2003, p. 253 s
Link to this article
You can simply select and copy link from below text field.
|
|
