Suchergebnisse

"This book develops a conceptual framework of the principle of mutual trust in EU criminal law. Mutual trust is a household term in the EU criminal law vocabulary and is widely regarded to be a prerequisite for a successful application of mutual recognition. But despite its importance, the parameters of the concept are not clear. The book demonstrates that mutual trust is multi-faceted: combining the elements essential to a successful EU criminal law, as part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The book approaches trust from multiple angles. First, a study of social science literature. Second, a meticulous assessment of mutual trust in EU criminal law. Third, a study of trust in US interstate criminal justice cooperation. Finally, the book identifies a comprehensive approach to tackle trust related difficulties in EU criminal law. This timely book will be of great interest to anyone looking to gain a full picture of this core principle in EU criminal law"--

What is trust? A social science perspective -- Institutional architecture of EU criminal law : mutual recognition as the 'cornerstone of judicial cooperation in criminal matters -- The 'flagship' mutual recognition instrument : the European arrest warrant and trust issues -- The court of justice of the European Union and the evolution of mutual trust -- Mutual trust in the EU criminal law discourse : from confidence to doubt -- The trust-building policy : an orchestrated effort or a patchwork of measures? -- Critical development of the principle of mutual trust : a work in progress -- A transatlantic perspective : trust lessons from a federal context -- Unpacking the principle of mutual trust : five building blocks -- A forward-looking assessment of mutual trust challenges.

Cover -- Title Page -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- List of Abbreviations -- Table of Cases -- Table of Legislation -- Introduction -- 1. The Topic of the Book: Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law -- 2. The Main Objective: Demystifying the Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law -- 3. Relevance -- 4. The Structure -- 5. Methodology -- 6. Scope and Delineation -- 1. What is Trust? A Social Science Perspective -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Towards a Body of Social Science Literature on Trust: Developing an Underdeveloped Term -- 3. Trust: We (Think We) Know it When We See it -- 4. Dissecting Trust: Risks and Interests as Key Aspects of Trust Relationships -- 4.1. The Willingness to Take Risks and the Need for Choice -- 4.2. Interests at the Core of Trust Relationships -- 5. Clarifying the Concept of Trust: More Specificity Please -- 5.1. Introduction -- 5.2. Cognitive or Non-Cognitive? -- 5.3. Distinguishing Trust from Trustworthiness -- 5.4. Grounds for Trustworthiness and the Importance of Information -- 5.5. Trust is a Term of Knowledge, the Trusting Relationship a Term of Action -- 5.6. Trust is a Three-Part Relationship: A Trusts B to do X -- 5.7. Mutual and Reciprocal Trust -- 5.8. Developmental Accounts of Trust: Trust as a Learning Process -- 6. Applying a Trust Framework to the EU Criminal Law Context -- 6.1. Introduction -- 6.2. Taking Risks in EU Criminal Law Cooperation: The Transfer of Discretion -- 6.3. Common Interests as an Indicator of EU Criminal Law Trust -- 6.4. Trust, between Whom? Determining the Subject of Trust in EU Criminal Law -- 6.5. A Trusts B to do X: Determining the Object of Trust in EU Criminal Law -- 6.6. The Value of a Social Science Perspective for EU Criminal Law -- 7. Conclusion.

The term mutual trust has become a household term in the EU criminal justice vocabulary and is regarded to be a prerequisite for a successful application of the principle of mutual recognition. Regardless of its widespread use, it is often used in the vernacular, as if clear in itself. But as mutual trust has become one of the core objectives of the EU's criminal justice policy, and legislation is adopted to build trust, more specificity is required. This article attempts to unpick the notion of trust into its various elements. The argument is put forward that next to the principle's legal and political components, it also consists of more 'social' elements, as trust is a social construct after all. An assessment of the concept of trust developed in the social sciences reveals these additional elements and puts forward the idea of trust as a hybrid notion.

This article analyses the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Nada v. Switzerland from the perspective of individual due process rights and the wider constitutional implications. In Nada v. Switzerland, the Strasbourg Court was asked to rule on the conformity of a State Party to the European Convention on Human Rights in its implementation of the United Nations individual counter-terrorist sanctions regime. The Court found violations of an applicant's right to respect for private and family life and right to an effective remedy. What the Court did not do was rule on the wider questions of hierarchy, i.e. the relationship between the Convention and binding resolutions by the United Nations Security Council that have precedence over any other international agreement by virtue of Article 103 UN Charter. By choosing to harmonise norms originating in different legal contexts, the Court avoided this fundamental question. However, elements of pluralism and constitutionalism can be found in the judgment. By not giving precedence to the United Nations sanctions regime, the Court has implicitly made a statement about the question of hierarchy, while at the same time managing to uphold its primary task of safeguarding States Parties' compliance with the Convention.