The Recognition of Legal Surveillance Measures as an Alternative to Detention on Remand in European Union

Author:Ion Rusu
Position:Senior Lecturer PhD., Faculty of Law, 'Danubius' University of Galati, 3 Galati Boulevard, 800654 Galati, Romania
Pages:34-55
SUMMARY

The objectives of the research aim at examining the deposition of the European legislative act in terms of their implementation by the Romanian judicial authorities, of the national legislative act, a comparative examination, critical comments and proposals de lege ferenda.

 
FREE EXCERPT
ACTA UNIVERSITAT
34
Abstract:
The objectives of
act in terms of their implem
act, a comparative examinat
continuation of others made
Union, especially in the
activ
another Member S
tate. The
the provisions of European l
flaws in the Romanian and
practitioners and all those w
and sensitive at the same t
examination of the depositi
on
Keywords:
European legisla
1. Introduction
The most important form
in our
opinion the reco
documents emanating f
is now being achieved
conventions of di
fferent
At EU level this form o
adopting several norm
legislation in the field.
1
Senior Lecturer Ph
D., Facu
Galati, Romania. Tel.: +40.3
danubius.ro.
ATIS DANUBIUS
Vol. 8, n
The Recognition of Legal Su
rvei
Measures as an Alternative to Dete
Remand in European Union
Ion RUSU
1
of the research aim at examining the deposition of the Europe
ementation by the Romanian judicial authorities, of the nation
nation, critical comments and proposal
s de lege ferenda
. Thi
de in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters in
ctivity of recognition and enforcement of judicial decisions em
e Results of the study focuses in particular on the possibility
n legislative act by the Romanian judicial authorities, the ide
d Eu ropean legislation. The paper is useful
for teachers, ma
who wish to improve their knowledge in this area particula
e time. The scientific contribution of the work results from
ons of both normative acts and the formulated proposals
de le
slative act; offence; Romanian judicial authorities
orm of international judicial cooperation in crimina
ecognition and enforcement of court judgments a
g from another state. The activity itself is very com
ed based on mutual trust, reciprocity, treaties or
ent states or the national law.
of judicial cooperation in criminal matters was re
rmative acts designed to ensure the harmonizat
culty of Law, “Danubius” University of Galati, 3 Galati Boule
.372.361.102, fax: +40.372.361.290. Corresponding author:
io
AUDJ, Vol. 8, no.
8, no
. 1/2012
veillance
etention on
ion
pean legislative
tional legislative
his paper is the
in the European
emanating from
lity of execut ing
identification of
master students,
ularly important
rom the critical
e lege ferenda
.
inal matters is
s and judicial
omplex and it
r the ratified
s regulated by
zation of the
ulevard, 800654
ionrusu@univ
-
no. 1
, pp. 34- 55
JURIDICA
35
Among the adopted normative acts we mention two that seem to be of paramount
importance for perfecting the cooperation activities of Member States and even the
European Union evolution, namely the Council Framework Decision
2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the principle of mutual recognition in the
case of court judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or
measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in
the European Union
1
and Council Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA of 27
November 2008 on the principle of mutual recognition in the case of court
judgments and probation decisions for the supervision of probation measures and
alternative sanctions.
2
Amid the formulation of critical comments, especially by the
European Court of Human Rights, the two European regulations were subsequently
amended and supplemented by the adoption of Council Framework Decision
2009/299/JAI of 26 February 2009.
3
This new modifying normative act makes a
number of additions regarding the possibility of case retrial in which the person
was not present at the trial where the person was condemned.
Given the stages of criminal proceedings and based on the conclusions of the
Tampere European Council of 15 and 16 October 1999, it was established that the
principle of mutual recognition should apply in the prosecution phase as well, i.e.
pre-trial phase.
In applying this principle, a person who is resident in a Member State, but subject
to criminal proceedings in another Member State, must be supervised by competent
judicial authorities of the State in which he resides, until the starting of the trial.
The application of the mentioned principle must include strengthening the right to
liberty and the presumption of innocence in the European Union as a whole and
ensuring cooperation between Member States where a person is submitted to some
obligations or is subject to supervision until the trial and the adoption of a decision
by the competent court. In this way, it promotes the use of non-custodial measures
as an alternative to detention on remand, even if, in accordance with the laws of the
Member State concerned, it could not be imposed the ab initio to a detention on
remand.
Also, according to the wording of the preamble to the European legislative act,
regarding detention of persons subject to criminal proceedings, there is the risk of a
1
Published in the European Union Official Journal no. L 327/27 of 12.05.2008
2
Published in the European Union Official Journal no. L 337/122 of 12. 16.2008.
3
Published in the European Union Official Journal no. L 81/24 of 03.27.2009.

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL