A Bridge over Troubled Water – a Criminal Lawyers’ Response to Taricco II 

The recent CJEU judgment in M.A.S., M.B. (hereinafter Taricco II) raises more questions than it answers on when Member States can apply higher standards of rights in criminal proceedings. Previous case law, i.e. Taricco I and Melloni, pervaded the primacy of EU law, but from Jeremy F. we also know that Member States enjoy a […]

Continue Reading →

The Taricco Decision: A Last Attempt to Avoid a Clash between EU Law and the Italian Constitution

Is Italy obliged by EU law to pursue criminal acts longer than provided by Italian law? This question might cause a fundamental clash between the Italian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice. Unlike the CJEU, the Italian Constitutional Court interprets a retroactive suspension of the limitation period as a matter of principle of legality, and thereby as a matter of a core principle of Italian constitutional law. By referring the case to the CJEU, the Italian Constitutional Court gives the European Court a chance to revisit its jurisdiction while avoiding the identity language of the German Constitutional Court – good news for cooperative constitutionalism in Europe.

Continue Reading →

Illegal Entry into the Federal Republic of Germany de lege lata et de lege ferenda – a Critical Interjection

Illegal entry into Germany has led to penal proceedings since the first influx of refugees in 2015. Police investigations are opened against anyone entering without a passport or valid entry documents. This means that refugees are liable to prosecution by entering Germany and filing a petition for asylum. The right of residence desperately needs to be reformed. De lege ferenda, it makes sense to eliminate the discriminating legal status provided under Art. 31 I GFK and “de-criminalize” affected refugees.

Continue Reading →