Suchergebnisse

The title of this paper identifies key words starting with police and judicial cooperation, to proceed with European level agencies responsible for this cooperation, and Eurojust Euopol, respectively, and further with the new mechanism of this cooperation, the Joint Teams investigation. While it is true that this cooperation has its origins in Title VI, under the third pillar of the Treaty on European Union signed on 7 February 1992 in Maastricht, the successive developments at European and international treaty for the European Union underwent significant changes , and so changed the provisions relating to judicial and police cooperation, the Treaty of Amsterdam and the Treaty of Nice to achieve the changes brought by the Lisbon Treaty (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union).Precisely, the evolution of judicial and police cooperation, is the starting point of this paper, because through a brief overview, the judicial and police cooperation, can be identified, mechanisms and agencies of the European Union, created specifically for this purpose, especially Europol and Eurojust. DOI:10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n1p103

AbstractThis article was initially published as a discussion paper of the International Centre for Counter Terrorism — The Hague for an expert meeting on 'Joint Investigation Teams: Added Value, Opportunities and Obstacles in the Struggle against Terrorism'. The article examines the concept and practice of Joint Investigation Teams as vehicles for international cooperation in the fight against terrorism, taking into consideration a number of the recommendations that came out of the meeting that was held in The Hague in February 2011.

One of the most serious problems troubling the European Union is the evolution of cross-border crimes and, in particular, international terrorism and organised crime. National law enforcement authorities cannot fight cross-border crimes efficiently if their efforts are made solely on a national level. Since the early 1990s, the (European) political authorities have become increasingly aware of this problem and have taken steps to facilitate the participation of the law enforcement and other relevant personnel from other state(s) in investigating offences. This has resulted in the adoption of a vast number of documents and new instruments (eg the European Arrest Warrant), and the creation of new agencies within the European Union, the aim of which is to facilitate cross-border activities to fight cross-border crimes.

ANOTĀCIJA Starpvalstu sadarbības aktualitāti noziedzīgu nodarījumu izmeklēšanā nosaka kriminālās pasaules kvalitatīvi jaunas formas un kvantitatīvi jauni apjomi. Noziedzīgās pasaules ietekme strauji pieaugusi globālo pārmaiņu laikā, un līdz ar to pieaug nozīme policijas un citu tiesībaizsardzības iestāţu sadarbībai starp valstīm, transformējot tradicionālus sadarbības veidus. Kriminālprocesa likuma sadaļā ―Atsevišķi starptautiskās sadarbības jautājumi‖ ir iekļauta nodaļa ―Apvienotās izmeklēšanas grupas‖. Nevienā citā normatīvā aktā, kas reglamentē šī sadarbības veida jautājumus, nav sastopams jēdziens ―apvienotās izmeklēšanas grupas‖, taču tiek lietots apzīmējums ―kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas‖. Kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas ir salīdzinoši jauns starpvalstu sadarbības veids, kurš ir lietderīgs, izmeklējot transnacionālus organizētus noziedzīgus nodarījumus. Divpusēja vai daudzpusēja sadarbība notiek uz vienošanās pamata, kurā puses atrunā kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas izveidošanas mērķi, dalībniekus, periodu un kuram papildus tiek pievienots detalizēts pasākumu plāns. Kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas iegūst arvien plašāku piemērošanu, kaut gan sākotnēji bija paredzēts, ka to izveidošana iespējama noteiktu noziedzīgu nodarījumu izmeklēšanā, pie kuriem bija pieskaitāms narkotiku, cilvēktirdzniecības un terorisma apkarošana. Kaut gan, analizējot kopējo izmeklēšanas grupu izveidošanas mērķus, ir jāsecina, ka pamatā grupa tiek izveidota ar mērķi izmeklēt kāda kriminālā grupējuma darbības. Veidojot drošības, brīvības un tiesiskuma telpu, Eiropas Savienībā paplašina atsevišķu krimināltiesisko institūciju pilnvaras. Kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas arvien aktīvāk atbalsta Eirojusts un tā nacionālie pārstāvji. Viedokļi par kopējo izmeklēšanas grupu darbības efektivitāti, tostarp par ekonomiskās lietderības aspektiem, ir daţādi: ir atbalstītāji un ir pretinieki. Tomēr, lai gan tās pastāv neilgu laiku, kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas ir ieguvušas pozitīvus darba rezultātus. Analizējot iegūto pieredzi, tiek veikti uzlabojumi kopējo izmeklēšanas grupu funkcionēšanas nodrošināšanai. Kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas ļauj paaugstināt starpvalstu vajāšanas spiedienu, ko izjūt noziedznieki no visām dalībvalstīm, atsevišķos gadījumos tiek pārvarēta tiesiskās sadarbības barjera, nodibināti kontakti, sadarbībā notiek pieredzes un profesionalitātes izaugsme. Darba pētījuma objekts ir starpvalstu tiesībaizsardzības iestāţu divpusēja un daudzpusēja sadarbība transnacionālo organizēto noziedzīgu nodarījumu izmeklēšanā, kas globālās tiesiskās telpas formēšanas apstākļos iegūst jaunas formas. Izpētot tiesību regulējumu un juridisko praksi, tiek izstrādāti priekšlikumi nacionālā normatīva regulējuma pilnveidošanai, piedāvājot optimizēt sadarbību kopējās izmeklēšanas grupās. Šis promocijas darbs ir Latvijā pirmais zinātniskais darbs par starpvalstu sadarbību kopējās izmeklēšanas grupās, to teorētiskajiem un praktiskajiem jautājumiem. Atslēgas vārdi: kopējās izmeklēšanas grupas, starpvalstu krimināltiesiskā sadarbība, policijas pārrobeţu sadarbība, noziedzīgu nodarījumu izmeklēšana. ; ABSTRACT The topicality of inter-state cooperation in investigation of criminal offences is proved by qualitatively new forms and quantitatively new volumes of the criminal world. During the period of global changes the influence of the criminal world has considerably increased as a result of which the role of international cooperation of police and other law enforcement agencies has also become more important transforming the traditional forms of cooperation. The chapter ‗Specific Issues of International Cooperation' of the Criminal Law contains a section ‗United Investigation Teams'. One would not come across the notion ‗united investigation teams' in any other regulatory enactment regulating the matters related to this form of collaboration; instead, the term ‗joint investigation teams' is used. Joint investigation teams are a relatively new form of inter-state cooperation that is expedient in investigating transnational organised crime. Bilateral or multilateral cooperation is based on an agreement in which the parties thereto specify the purpose for which a joint investigation team is set up, the participants and the period thereof; a detailed operational action plan is additionally attached to such agreement. Joint investigation teams are being used more extensively despite the fact that initially they were intended to be set up for investigating specific criminal offences, especially such as fighting against trafficking of drugs, humans, and terrorism. However, analysing the purposes for which joint investigation teams are established, it may be concluded that generally such a team is set up with the aim to investigate the activity of a criminal group. Creating the area of justice, freedom and security, the European Union extends the authority of specific criminal institutions. Joint investigation teams are more actively supported by Eurojust and national representatives thereof. Opinions regarding the effectiveness of work of joint investigation teams, including the aspects of economic efficiency, vary: there are both supporters and opponents. However, despite their short existence, joint investigation teams have showed positive work results. Analysing the experience gained, improvements are made to ensure functioning of joint investigation teams. Joint investigation teams allow intensifying cross-border prosecution felt by criminals in all member states; in some cases, the barrier of judicial cooperation is overcome, contacts are established, as well as experience and professional development take place as a result of such cooperation. The object of the research is bilateral and multilateral cooperation of transnational law enforcement agencies in investigating transnational organised crime which under the conditions of formation of the global legal space takes new forms. Having examined legal regulations and legal practice, proposals for improvement of the national statutory regulation are developed offering to optimise cooperation within joint investigation teams. This thesis is the first scientific work on cross-border cooperation in joint investigation teams and its theoretical and practical questions in Latvia. Key words: joint investigation teams; justice cooperation in criminal matters, police cross-border cooperation, crime investigation.

The article is focused on identifying the problems that appear while using the Joint Investigation Teams (JIT) as a tool of obtaining transnational criminal evidence in the EU and, once detected, analyzing those problems, and other circumstances concerning JIT, in order to reach solid conclusions aimed to improve their effectiveness. The conclusions mentioned above can only be achieved by reaching a whole and clear vision of the utility of the JIT, as a way to obtain criminal evidence, and determining whether the results of their investigations have, or not, the suitable level of guarantee regarding their admissibility in a criminal procedure. ; El objetivo de este artículo es identificar los problemas que surgen en el empleo de los Equipos Conjuntos de Investigación (ECI) como herramienta de compartición de la prueba transfronteriza en el seno de la UE, y analizar estos problemas y las circunstancias que rodean a su funcionamiento, para obtener conclusiones coherentes que nos lleven a contribuir en su mejora. Para alcanzar los fines mencionados en el párrafo anterior es importante dar una visión clara sobre la utilidad de los ECI en la obtención de la prueba transfronteriza y determinar hasta qué punto los resultados de la investigación que se obtienen a través de un ECI presentan o no ciertas garantías de eficacia en el posterior proceso judicial.

Recent research on team personality has paid growing attention to team agreeableness; yet the literature is replete with mixed findings regarding the relationship between team agreeableness and team performance. Following the emerging trend of examining the moderating role of team personality traits in team dynamics, we propose a novel view of team agreeableness as a moderator for the relationship between team member satisfaction and team performance. With 230 senior-level professionals in 42 self-managed teams, we found that when team agreeableness was low, team member satisfaction was positively related to team performance, whereas when team agreeableness was high, team member satisfaction was not significantly related to team performance. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.