Autor: STEJERAN Roxana-Maria
Publicat în: Caiete de drept penal nr. 2/2017
Disponibil online: aici.
Rezumat: Având în vedere creşterea circulaţiei persoanelor în Uniunea Europeană, autorităţile naţionale ale statelor membre şi-au extins competenţa de a ancheta o cauză penală. Astfel, când două sau mai multe state membre au iniţiat proceduri paralele pentru aceleaşi fapte, împotriva aceleiaşi persoane, conflictul trebuie soluţionat în timpul desfăşurării procedurilor, înainte de a exista o hotărâre definitivă, deoarece în caz contrar devine incident principiul ne bis in idem.
Statele membre au adoptat un temei juridic pentru prevenirea şi soluţionarea conflictelor de jurisdicţie în materie penală, şi anume Decizia-cadru 2009/948/JAI. Însă, analizând decizia-cadru se constată că aceasta este cam lipsită de conţinut, impunându-se schimbarea cadrului legislativ, prin instituirea unei noi directive. Izvorul propunerilor îl reprezintă o propunere legislativă din 2003, denumită propunerea Freiburg, dar şi comparaţiile cu dreptul intern, dreptul civil, cu cel internaţional privat, dar şi cu celelalte instrumente ce contribuie la cooperarea judiciară în materie penală la nivel european.
Cuvinte-cheie: conflict de jurisdicţie; prevenire; soluţionare; proceduri paralele; consens; principiul ne bis in idem; propunere legislativă; propunerea Freiburg.
Titlul lucrării în engleză: The prevention and the settlement of the conflict of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings
Abstract: The development of the European area of freedom, security and justice attracted by itself a series of negative consequences. Owing to the increase in the movement of persons in the European Union, the national authorities of the Member States extended their jurisdiction for prosecuting criminal cases. Consequently, the criminal justice systems of the European Union are now confronted with situations where several Member States have criminal jurisdiction to investigate and bring to trial the same facts relating to the commission of criminal offences. When two or more Member States have initiated parallel proceedings for the same facts against the same person, the conflict of jurisdiction should be resolved while proceedings are ongoing in two or more Member States and before a final judgement, as otherwise the principle of ne bis in idem becomes applicable.
Before the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the Member States adopted a new legal instrument to regulate the conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings, namely the Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA. However, by analysing the framework decision, one will find that it is rather empty of legal content, thus requiring a change of the legal framework through the adoption of a new directive. In order to suggest changes, it is necessary to make comparisons with Romanian domestic law, with civil law and with private international law, but also with other instruments contributing to judicial cooperation in criminal proceedings under European law, like the European arrest warrant (EAW), the European Protection Order (OEP), and the European Investigation Order (EIO). Moreover, a legislative proposal presented by the Freiburg Team in 2003 suggested a much wider approach, which, in short, puts forward solutions for preventing and resolving conflicts of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings. The proposal arose from the fact that, under the current rules, many of the consequences are detrimental both to the rights and the interests of individuals and to those of the Member States, putting the national authorities to more work.
Keywords: conflict of jurisdiction, prevention, settlement, parallel proceedings, consensus, ne bis in idem principle, the Freiburg Team, legislative proposal.
