The European Public Prosecutor’s Office – the protecion of the EU’s financial interests as a supranational integration project

  • Werner Miguel Kühn Court of Justice of the European Union, 1 Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald, Luxembourg 2925, Luxembourg

Abstract

This article presents an overview of the competencies of the recently established European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), a supranational body that investigates and prosecutes criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the European Union. Various aspects related to criminal procedure and substantive criminal law will be discussed to explain how the EPPO is embedded in the national judicial systems despite its supranational origin. Among the matters to be examined will be the requirement to prosecute crime efficiently while ensuring that the procedural rights of the suspects and the accused persons will be duly respected. A particular focus will be on cooperation with the other EU entities and national authorities both in the member states as well as in third countries. This article provides elements to help readers assess the EPPO’s performance against the legislative objectives set by the EU.

Author Biography

Werner Miguel Kühn, Court of Justice of the European Union, 1 Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald, Luxembourg 2925, Luxembourg

doctor of law, legal advisor

References

  1. Kühn WM. The phenomenon of “agencification” in the administration of the European Union. Ukrainian Journal of Constitutional Law. 2020;2:44–73.
  2. Mitsilegas V. EU criminal law. Oxford: Oxford University press; 2022. 776 p. DOI: 10.5040/9781474203401.
  3. Elholm T. EPPO and a common sense of justice. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2021;28(2):212–228.
  4. Kühn WM. Aspectos jurídicos y perspectivas políticas de una posible retirada de la Unión Europea por parte del Reino Unido. Revista de la Secretaría del Tribunal Permanente de Revisión del Mercosur. 2016;4:64–93.
  5. Petrasch M. Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft ante portas. Corporate Compliance Zeitschrift. 2021;3:126–132.
  6. Kühn WM. The reform of the EEA rules on public procurement. Upphandlingsrättslig Tidskrift. 2015;2:150–179.
  7. Martin-Vignerte E. Procedural safeguards in EPPO cross-border investigations. ERA Forum. 2020;3:501–513.
  8. Kühn WM. Problemas jurídicos de la Decisión Marco relativa a la Orden de detención europea y a los procedimientos de entrega entre los Estados Miembros de la Unión Europea [Internet; cited 2022 December 20]. Available from: https://revistas.uva.es/index.php/ree/article/view/7394.
  9. Kühn WM. Responsabilidad extracontractual de la Unión Europea violación por parte de su Tribunal de Justicia del derecho fundamental a una duración razonable del proceso. Revista de la Secretaría del Tribunal Permanente de Revisión del Mercosur. 2018;6:169–199.
  10. Christodoulou H. Le parquet européen: prémices d’une autorité judiciaire de l’Union européenne. Paris: Dalloz; 2021. 518 p.
  11. De Hert P, Papakonstantinou V. Data protection and the EPPO. New Journal of European Criminal Law. 2019;10(1):34–43.
  12. Kühn WM. The principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions in EU law in the light of the full faith and credit clause of the US Constitution. Boletín mexicano de derecho comparado. 2014;140:449–484.
  13. Weyembergh A, Briere C. Towards a European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). Brussels: Directorate-General for Internal Policies; 2016. 58 p.
  14. Wade M. The EPPO and the pitfalls of actuarial justice. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2021;28(2):265–280. DOI: 10.1177/1023263X211006516.
  15. Ligeti K. The structure of the EPPO: features and challenges. Hrvatski ljetopis za kaznene znanosti i praksu. 2020;27(1):33–53.
  16. Lažetić G. A short overview of some challenging issues regarding the successful functioning of the EPPO. Hrvatskiljetopis za kaznene znanosti i praksu. 2020;27(1):187–208.
  17. Espina Ramos J. The relationship between Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. In: Bachmaier Winter L, editor. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office: the challenges ahead. Madrid: Springer; 2018. p. 87–101.
  18. Niblock R. Cooperation with EU agencies and bodies under the EU – UK Trade and cooperation agreement: Eurojust, OLAF and the EPPO. New Journal of European Criminal Law. 2021;12(2):277–282.
  19. Landwehr O. External relations of the EPPO: cooperation with OLAF. Hrvatski ljetopis za kaznene znanosti i praksu. 2020;27(1):245–246.
  20. Franssen N. The future judicial cooperation between the EPPO and non-participating member states. New Journal of European Criminal Law. 2018;9(3):291–299.
  21. Codruta Kövesi L. Wir holen das Geld zurück, das den EU – Finanzministern durch die Lappen geht. Die Presse. 2022 September 2.
  22. Franssen N. The future judicial cooperation between the EPPO and third countries. New Journal of European Criminal Law. 2019;10(2):168–185.
  23. Fitzmaurice M. Third parties and the Law of treaties. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law. 2002;6:37–138.
  24. Andreone F. L’institution du Parquet européen. Revue de l’Union européenne. 2018;61:43–59.
  25. Kühn WM. The draft protocol on the creation of the Court of Justice of Mercosur – a new milestone in the judicialisation of regional integration law. Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations. 2017;2:55–71.
  26. Wahl T. EPPO appointed EDPs from Slovenia. Eucrim. 2021;4:199–235.
  27. Suhr O. EUV/AEUV Kommentar. Munich: C. H. Beck; 2022. 3044 S.
  28. Martín Pascual E. Últimos avances en la cooperación judicial penal: la cooperación reforzada permite la creación de la Fiscalía Europea a partir del Reglamento (UE) 2017/1939. European Papers. 2018;3(2):933–946.
  29. Kirilowits N. Cécile Soriano: “Défendre les intérêts financiers de l’Union européenne n’est rien d’autre qu’un acte démocratique!” [Internet; cited 2022 December 20]. Available from: https://www.actu-juridique.fr/international/international-etrangers/droits-europeen-ue/cecile-soriano-defendre-les-interets-financiers-de-lunion-europeenne-nest-rien-dautre-quun-acte-democratique/#:~:-text=Imprimer-,C%C3%A9cile%20Soriano%20%3A%20%C2%AB%20D%C3%A9fendre%20les%20int%C3%A9r%C3%AAts%20financiers%20de%20l’Union,qu’un%20acte%20d%C3%A9mocratique%20%C2%BB%20!&text=Un%20peu%20plus%20d’un,par%20les%20acteurs%20institutionnels%20europ%C3%A9ens.
  30. Di Francesco Maesa C. EPPO and environmental crime: may the EPPO ensure a more effective protection of the environment in the EU? New Journal of European Criminal Law. 2018;9(2):191–215.
  31. Schnichels D, Seyderhelm J. Die Reform des europäischen Umweltstrafrechts. Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht. 2020;19:829–832.
  32. Munivrana Vajda M. Questioning the jurisdiction of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Hrvatski ljetopis za kaznene znanosti i praksu. 2020;27(1):117–122.
  33. Magnus D. Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft – Vorzüge und Schwächen des aktuellen EU-Verordnungsvorschlag. Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik. 2015;6:181–184.
  34. Wahl T. EPPO cases: April – July [Internet; cited 2022 December 20]. Available from: https://eucrim.eu/news/convictions-in-eppo-cases-april-july-2022/.
Published
2023-06-22
Keywords: European Union, European Public Prosecutor, international cooperation, financial interests, law enforcement, criminal procedure, fundamental rights, rule of law
How to Cite
Kühn, W. M. (2023). The European Public Prosecutor’s Office – the protecion of the EU’s financial interests as a supranational integration project. Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations, 1, 71-95. Retrieved from https://journals.bsu.by/index.php/internationalRelations/article/view/5246
Issue
No 1 (2023): Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations
Section
International Law

Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The authors who are published in this journal agree to the following:

  1. The authors retain copyright on the work and provide the journal with the right of first publication of the work on condition of license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial. 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
  2. The authors retain the right to enter into certain contractual agreements relating to the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g. post it on the institutional repository, publication in the book), with the reference to its original publication in this journal.
  3. The authors have the right to post their work on the Internet (e.g. on the institutional store or personal website) prior to and during the review process, conducted by the journal, as this may lead to a productive discussion and a large number of references to this work. (See The Effect of Open Access.)