Suchergebnisse

This paper deals with policing the external borders of the European Union (EU), an issue that recently has witnessed significant developments in connection with the externalisation of the fight against undocumented migration. After a presentation of the conceptual elements underpinning the research (1), the paper presents the EU agency Frontex and its origin, tasks and responsibilities (2). The next section will focus on Frontex-led operations carried out at the southern maritime border (3), in order to critically look at issues arising in this context (4), with reference to their legal framework. The results of my analysis will be discussed in connection with the externalisation of migration policies, arguing that the EU and Member States (MSs) have engaged into a multiple exercise of venue shopping, to conclude with a (hopeful) outlook on the future, with the Lisbon Treaty providing new possibilities to fix current problems (5).

This article presents and discusses some recent decisions on the European Arrest Warrant by the Italian higher courts, the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation. Though not as challenging to the EAW as the 'first round' of European judgments of 2005, they bring however some interesting developments on aspects concerning the enforcement of EAW and domestic provisions related to fundamental rights protection. Secondly, these cases allow analysis of mutual recognition, the principle underlying the whole EAW system. A first element stressed here is the importance of dialogue among European actors on third pillar instruments and more generally subjects involving criminal law and justice administration. Secondly, it is suggested here that there are several views on the EAW and mutual recognition. Analysis of Italian case law reveals that domestic courts are faced with the issue of enforcing EAW and securing fundamental rights protection; in so doing, they remain anchored in the domestic system of legal guarantees, which could lead to divergent solutions across European states. The suggestion made is that mutual recognition requires an active role to be played by courts, that it has systemic implications, and that it requires domestic courts to be able to exercise some political discretion, not so different as under extradition schemes.