|
Size: 1313
Comment:
|
Size: 1584
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| = A Commission operation will make European criminal law unstoppable = | ------ [[http://www.ipred.org/MainPage Introduction]] [[http://www.ipred.org/analysis Analysis]] [[http://www.ipred.org/howto How To]] [[http://www.ipred.org/factsheet Fact sheet]] [[http://www.ipred.org/backdoor Backdoor]] ------ = European criminal law by the back door = A Commission operation will make European criminal law unstoppable. |
| Line 4: | Line 9: |
| stating that this route is no longer available. This is nonsense, as IPRED 2 shows. The IPRED 2 measures are not essential, IPRED 2 should never have |
stating that this route is no longer available. This is nonsense, as [http://www.ipred.org/MainPage IPRED 2] shows. The IPRED 2 measures are not essential, IPRED 2 should never have |
| Line 10: | Line 14: |
| their provisions were adopted on the wrong legal basis." This remains to be seen, for instance, like IPRED 2, there are some art 95 frameworks. |
their provisions were adopted on the wrong legal basis." |
| Line 13: | Line 16: |
| If these are "repaired", while the measures are not essential, precedents | This remains to be seen. If these framework decisions are "repaired", while the measures are not essential, precedents |
http://www.ipred.org/MainPage Introduction http://www.ipred.org/analysis Analysis http://www.ipred.org/howto How To http://www.ipred.org/factsheet Fact sheet http://www.ipred.org/backdoor Backdoor
European criminal law by the back door
A Commission operation will make European criminal law unstoppable.
After case C 176/03 the Commission retracted pending framework decisions, stating that this route is no longer available. This is nonsense, as [http://www.ipred.org/MainPage IPRED 2] shows. The IPRED 2 measures are not essential, IPRED 2 should never have become a codecision directive.
But there is more. "As a result of the Court´s judgment the framework decisions in annex are entirely or partly incorrect, since all or some of their provisions were adopted on the wrong legal basis."
This remains to be seen.
If these framework decisions are "repaired", while the measures are not essential, precedents are created. The Commission can say: we solved this with a codecision directive, then this needs a codecision directive too.
A door opened a bit by the ECJ, is kicked open by the Commission.
It was already highly questionable that a Community institution (ECJ) gave the Community the right to make criminal laws, the member states never gave it to the Community. The Commission contemplates a further assault on the sovereignty of the member states.
Every proposal for "regularisation" has to be scrutinised.
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2005/com2005_0583en01.pdf