8

wynik(i)

Słowo/słowa
Rodzaj publikacji
Obszar polityki
Autor
Słowo kluczowe
Data

Mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders

12-12-2018

In order to respond more effectively to the challenge of criminals and terrorists hiding assets in other Member States, in 2016 the European Commission proposed a regulation on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders in criminal matters. The directly applicable instrument removes the need for national transposition, broadens the scope of the current rules to cover new types of confiscation and includes provisions on victims' rights to restitution and compensation. In June 2018, ...

In order to respond more effectively to the challenge of criminals and terrorists hiding assets in other Member States, in 2016 the European Commission proposed a regulation on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders in criminal matters. The directly applicable instrument removes the need for national transposition, broadens the scope of the current rules to cover new types of confiscation and includes provisions on victims' rights to restitution and compensation. In June 2018, provisional agreement was reached in interinstitutional negotiations and the European Parliament voted the agreed text on 4 October 2018. The Council followed suit on 6 November 2018. The final act was signed on 14 November and published in the Official Journal of the EU on 28 November 2018. The regulation will apply 24 months after its entry into force, namely from 19 December 2020. Second edition. The ‘EU Legislation in Progress’ briefings are updated at key stages throughout the legislative procedure.

Nakazy zabezpieczenia i konfiskaty mienia

26-09-2018

W 2016 r. Komisja Europejska zaproponowała nowe rozporządzenie mające na celu udoskonalenie ram prawnych UE dotyczących zabezpieczenia i konfiskaty mienia pochodzącego z działalności przestępczej w sprawach transgranicznych. Obejmuje ono nowe rodzaje nakazów konfiskaty, przyspiesza procedury oraz zapewnia ofiarom prawo do odszkodowania i zwrotu mienia. Głosowanie w Parlamencie Europejskim nad tekstem uzgodnionym w negocjacjach trójstronnych powinno się odbyć w czasie pierwszej sesji plenarnej w październiku ...

W 2016 r. Komisja Europejska zaproponowała nowe rozporządzenie mające na celu udoskonalenie ram prawnych UE dotyczących zabezpieczenia i konfiskaty mienia pochodzącego z działalności przestępczej w sprawach transgranicznych. Obejmuje ono nowe rodzaje nakazów konfiskaty, przyspiesza procedury oraz zapewnia ofiarom prawo do odszkodowania i zwrotu mienia. Głosowanie w Parlamencie Europejskim nad tekstem uzgodnionym w negocjacjach trójstronnych powinno się odbyć w czasie pierwszej sesji plenarnej w październiku.

Mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders

20-06-2017

The IA for the proposed regulation has a number of weaknesses that could be attributed to political urgency and the need for EU action in the area of freezing and confiscation of criminal assets, notably since the recent terrorist attacks in France, Belgium and Germany. Overall, the IA lacks sound data and this is openly recognised throughout the document. In the context of the IA, no public consultation took place and no ex-post evaluation of existing mutual recognition instruments was carried out ...

The IA for the proposed regulation has a number of weaknesses that could be attributed to political urgency and the need for EU action in the area of freezing and confiscation of criminal assets, notably since the recent terrorist attacks in France, Belgium and Germany. Overall, the IA lacks sound data and this is openly recognised throughout the document. In the context of the IA, no public consultation took place and no ex-post evaluation of existing mutual recognition instruments was carried out. The IA does not explain clearly how addressing the deficiencies in the existing EU legislation and its implementation would increase recovery of criminal assets in cross-border cases, as there is a general lack of data in this policy context. As for the options proposed, the IA could perhaps have clarified why sub-options 4a and 4b were discussed jointly, whereas option 3 was presented as a stand-alone option. In addition to this, the regulatory options could have been checked in the light of the principle of subsidiarity. The IA could have explained in more detail what it means by 'harmonised grounds for non-recognition based on fundamental rights', which seem not to have been included in articles 9 and 18 of the proposal. In general, the choice of legal instrument is left outside the scope of the impact analysis and the choice in favour of a regulation seems rather pre-determined. The IA could have addressed the impact of adopting a regulation on those 12 Member States that currently have more restrictive approaches to confiscation. Finally, it could have stated whether stakeholders were consulted on the choice of instrument, and how the preferred option accommodates the divergent views of the stakeholders on the issue of mutual recognition as an alternative to further harmonisation.

The Cost of Non-Europe in the area of Organised Crime and Corruption: Annex I - Organised Crime

10-03-2016

This Research Paper examines the costs of non-Europe in the field of organised crime. It provides an interdisciplinary analysis of the main legal/ethical, socio-political and economic costs and benefits of the EU in policies on organised crime. It offers an in-depth examination of the transformative contribution that the EU has made, in terms of investigation, prosecution and efficiency, to trans-border operational activities and the protection of its citizens’ rights. Finally, it seeks to answer ...

This Research Paper examines the costs of non-Europe in the field of organised crime. It provides an interdisciplinary analysis of the main legal/ethical, socio-political and economic costs and benefits of the EU in policies on organised crime. It offers an in-depth examination of the transformative contribution that the EU has made, in terms of investigation, prosecution and efficiency, to trans-border operational activities and the protection of its citizens’ rights. Finally, it seeks to answer the questions of what are the costs and benefits of European cooperation and what forms of cooperation would bring more European added value.

Autorzy zewnętrzni

This final report has been written by: Dr Sergio Carrera, Senior Research Fellow and the Head of the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Section at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law at the of the University of Maastricht Prof. Elspeth Guild, Senior Associate Research Fellow at CEPS and Jean Monnet Professor ad personam at Queen Mary, University of London as well as at the Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands Lina Vosyliūtė, Researcher at the JHA Section at CEPS Dr Amandine Scherrer, Policy analyst and European Studies Coordinator at the centre d’étude sur les conflits (CCLS) Prof. Valsamis Mitsilegas, Head of the Department of Law, Professor of European Criminal Law and Director of the Criminal Justice Centre at Queen Mary, University of London

Asset recovery for Arab countries in transition

16-05-2013

Since the ousting of Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the EU has frozen assets of 67 people suspected of concealing abroad state funds misappropriated in Egypt and Tunisia. But despite high-level political declarations sup¬porting the recovery of these assets, there seems to be little prospect of their swift return to the countries of origin.

Since the ousting of Hosni Mubarak and Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the EU has frozen assets of 67 people suspected of concealing abroad state funds misappropriated in Egypt and Tunisia. But despite high-level political declarations sup¬porting the recovery of these assets, there seems to be little prospect of their swift return to the countries of origin.

The Need for New EU Legislation Allowing the Assets Confiscated from Criminal Organisations to be Used for Civil Society and in Particular for Social Purposes

15-02-2012

The note evaluates the current legislation on the asset recovery process both at the EU and Member States level, with a view to assessing the need and the feasibility of establishing EU regulation on the use of confiscated assets for civil society and in particular for social purposes. It points out that at the EU level only limited attention has been given to the final destination of confiscated assets and that within Member States using confiscated assets for social purposes is not a widely established ...

The note evaluates the current legislation on the asset recovery process both at the EU and Member States level, with a view to assessing the need and the feasibility of establishing EU regulation on the use of confiscated assets for civil society and in particular for social purposes. It points out that at the EU level only limited attention has been given to the final destination of confiscated assets and that within Member States using confiscated assets for social purposes is not a widely established practice. It analyses the advantages of the social re-use of confiscated assets and comes to the conclusion that there is a clear need for a coherent European approach. The note puts forward a series of recommendations ranging from the adoption of a European Directive on the social re-use of confiscated assets to the creation of a European Asset Recovery Database, a European Asset Recovery Fund and a European Asset Recovery Office.

Autorzy zewnętrzni

Basel Institute on Governance

The European Account Preservation Order

06-10-2011

Every year an estimated €55 billion in intra-EU trade is written off in bad debts. A significant part of this is theoretically recoverable from debtors' bank accounts. But with court judgments on the merits potentially taking several years, creditors have looked to provisional measures such as preservation orders to freeze a debtor's bank account.  Where there is a cross-border element, such orders have faced significant enforcement problems. They are currently used less and with a lower success ...

Every year an estimated €55 billion in intra-EU trade is written off in bad debts. A significant part of this is theoretically recoverable from debtors' bank accounts. But with court judgments on the merits potentially taking several years, creditors have looked to provisional measures such as preservation orders to freeze a debtor's bank account.  Where there is a cross-border element, such orders have faced significant enforcement problems. They are currently used less and with a lower success rate than orders used purely at domestic level.  Although the Brussels I Regulation ensures recognition of judgments of courts in other Member States, and its proposed reform would improve their enforceability, it does not address actual enforcement. There have therefore been consistent calls for an independent EU instrument addressing preservation orders.  Following a number of studies, a public consultation and an impact assessment which highlighted key issues as well as wide variations in Member State procedures, the Commission presented a proposal for a European Account Preservation Order in July 2011. The EP, which has called for a proposal on more than one occasion, will consider the text in the coming months.

Overview of European and International Legislation on Terrorist Financing

16-03-2009

Combating terrorist financing contributes to combating terrorism (terrorist acts and terrorist organisations). There is considerable international and European “legislation” on terrorist financing, and the initiatives taken in this field have increased significantly since the attacks of 11 September 2001. The main players, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the Financial Action Task Force and the European Union have addressed the issue of terrorist financing from different perspectives (the ...

Combating terrorist financing contributes to combating terrorism (terrorist acts and terrorist organisations). There is considerable international and European “legislation” on terrorist financing, and the initiatives taken in this field have increased significantly since the attacks of 11 September 2001. The main players, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the Financial Action Task Force and the European Union have addressed the issue of terrorist financing from different perspectives (the types of financing, the possibility of freezing and confiscating assets, etc.) whilst generally linking this issue to measures taken to combat money laundering. Although the issue of the adoption and ratification of this legislation is fundamental, its operational and judicial application is no less important, with intelligence sharing now appearing to be one of the driving forces in combating terrorist financing. Similarly, managing the United Nations and European Union “blacklists” in a way that observes fundamental rights and which is subject to judicial review is essential for the impartial and realistic implementation of targeted asset-freezing actions.

Autorzy zewnętrzni

Henri Labayle (University of Pau and Pays de l'Adour, France) and Nadja Long (European Centre for Judges and Lawyers, European Institute of Public Administration - EIPA, Luxembourg)

Planowane wydarzenia

26-10-2020
European Gender Equality Week - October 26-29, 2020
Inne wydarzenie -
FEMM TRAN LIBE BECA AIDA INTA CULT EMPL DROI SEDE DEVE
26-10-2020
Joint LIBE - FEMM Hearing on Trafficking in human beings
Przesłuchanie -
LIBE FEMM
27-10-2020
Hearing on Rebuilding fish stocks in the Mediterranean: next steps
Przesłuchanie -
PECH

Partnerzy