Constitutional conditions for a public prosecutor's office at the European level

European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 296-318

  Van Gerven, Walter ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c European Court of Justice ^*  (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856430638     PISSN: 09289569     EISSN: 15718174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/15718170020519201     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. M. Delmas-Marty, ed., Corpus Juris introducing penal provisions for the purpose of the financial interests of the European Union (Paris 1997).
2. In the meantime proposals of amendment have now been prepared: see M. Delmas-Marty, 'Combatting fraud - Necessity, legitimacy and feasibility of the Corpus Juris', 37 C.M.L. Rev. (2000), at pp. 247-256,
3. and in French: 'Nécessité, legitimité et faisabilité du Corpus Juris', 7 AGON (1999), No. Juris 25, at pp. 5-9.
4. For an enumeration, See by K. Lenaerts and P. van Nuffel, Constitutional Law of the European Union, R. Bray, ed. (London 1999) at p. 255, No. 4-229 where an overview is given of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, at pp. 253-258, Nos. 4-228-4-231.
5. For a comprehensive chronological overview of the fight against fraud, See Annex 1 to the Second report referred to in footnote 3. For an excellent scholarly discussion (however, before the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty; but see chapter 9 of the book): S. White, 'Protection of the Financial Interests to the European: the Fight against Fraud and Corruption', 15 European Monographs (1998) 244 pages.
6. Special Report no. 8/98 on the Commission's services specifically involved in the fight against fraud (⋯) OJ C-230 of 22 July 1998 referred to and commented on in the Second report of the Committee of Independent Experts referred to in footnote 3.
7. Commission Decision of 28 April 1999 establishing the European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF), OJ L-136 of 31 May 1999, at pp. 20-22.
8. Case C-226/97 Lemmens [1998] ECR I-3711, para. 19.
9. Case C-2/88 Imm. Zwartveld a.o. [1990] ECR I-3365, para. 17.
10. Case 68/88, Commission v. Greece [1989] ECR 2965, para. 23.
11. C 100-103/80 Musique Diffusion française v. Commission [1983] ECR 1825, paras. 7-8.
12. See further K. Lenaerts and J. Vanhamme, 'Procedural Rights of Private Parties in the Community Administrative Process', 34 C.M.L. Rev. (1997), pp. 531-569, at p. 555. (Pubitemid 127095299)
13. See M. den Boer's book review of N. Dorn, ed., 'Regulating European Drug problems. Administrative Measures and Civil Law in the Control of Drug Trafficking, Nuisance and Use', in 2000 MJ at p. 101.
14. Case 11-70, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft [1970] ECR 1125, paras. 3-4.
15. C-299/95, Kremzow v. Austria [1997] ECR I-2629, para. 14.
16. Opinion 2/94 [1996] ECR I-1759.
17. Case 5/88, Wachauf [1989] ECR 2609, para. 17.
18. See the Court's judgment in Case C-368/95 [1997] ECR I-3689;
19. See also B. De Witte, 'The Past and Future Role of the European Court of Justice in the Protection of Human Rights', in P. Alston, ed., The EU and Human Rights (1999), pp. 859-897, at pp. 873 ff. on the as yet unresolved question as to whether national legislation implementing a directive falls within the scope of Community law.
20. See also Article 309 (ex 236) EC where the Council is empowered to take some action by a qualified majority 'where the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of principles mentioned in Article 6(1) of the [TEU] has been determined in accordance with Article 7(1) of that Treaty', a provision much quoted lately with regard to recent political events in Austria. See further P. Gilliaux, 'l'Union européenne, à l'épreuve de gouvernements liberticides?', Journal des Tribunaux (2000), pp. 449-454.
21. See more generally, and with regard to Belgian law, M. De Rue, 'Les droits de l'homme et les méthodes modernes d'enquête policière', Journal des Tribunaux (2000), pp. 321-330.
22. Case T-450/93, Lisrestal v. Commission [1994] ECR II-1177, para. 42.
23. Joined Cases 46/87 and 227/88, Hoechst v. Commission [1989] ECR 2919, paras. 17 and 19; further references K. Lenaerts and P. Vanhamme, op. cit., at p. 552.
24. K. Lenaerts and D. Arts, Procedural Law of the European Union, R. Bray, ed. (London 1999), at pp. 144 ff.
25. C. Van den Wyngaert, 'Corpus Juris, parquet Européen et juge national vers une chambre préliminaire Européenne?', 7 AGON (1999), No. 23.