Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:43:13.872Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2011

Christina Eckes
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Theodore Konstadinides
Affiliation:
University of Surrey
Christina Eckes
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Theodore Konstadinides
Affiliation:
University of Surrey
Get access

Summary

Over the last decade the responsibilities of the European Union (EU) in protecting its citizens from crime, organised or otherwise, have expanded incrementally. Security-led issues have gained particular relevance following the attacks of 11 September 2001, 9 March 2004 and 7 July 2005 and the last two EU enlargements of 2004 and 2007. These events have not only contributed to externalising internal security issues (e.g. through political cooperation with third countries on issues of freedom, security and justice), they have also, most significantly, legitimised pan-European initiatives or, to put it otherwise, they have ‘Europeanised’ internal security issues. This has occurred through the adoption of a wide range of legislative instruments related to law enforcement, cooperation on the prevention and combating of crime, intelligence exchange and public order management.

Until the entering into force of the Treaty of Lisbon much of European criminal law was tucked away in the third pillar of the EU. With the Treaty of Lisbon, the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters has acquired an identifiable constitutional framework and has become a fully-fledged EU policy. The Treaty introduces the ordinary legislating procedure, involving the European Parliament and allowing the Council to vote by qualified majority in order to establish minimum rules. It also extends the Court's jurisdiction to cover areas of the former third pillar, albeit significantly limited by the transitional provisions (Protocol 36). Finally, the Union's available legislative instruments are strengthened and the principle of mutual recognition formally becomes the backbone of European criminal law.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Lange, R., ‘The European Public Order: Constitutional Principles and Fundamental Rights1(1) Erasmus Law Review (2009) 1–24, at 8Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×