One Step Forward in European Integration

The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO): One Step Forward in European Integration Presented by: Fabio Giuffrida Date: 26 January 2022 Overview 1. The EPPO in short 2. Relations with: a. Member States b. Member States that do not participate in the enhanced cooperation c. Third countries 3. Conclusions The EPPO In Short - The EPPO is competent to investigate and prosecute crimes affecting the budget of the European Union (PIF)  - Limited competence (for the moment) + no European police/European court The EPPO was established by means of enhanced cooperation in 2017 (Regulation (EU) 2017/1939): Denmark, Ireland, Sweden, Poland and Hungary do not participate - The EPPO started its operations on 1 June 2021 - The EPPO's headquarters are in Luxembourg but the EPPO has a complex structure The EPPO And The Member States - The EPPO strongly relies on national law/authorities: 1. Material competence → Directive/Framework Decision 2. Judicial review of EPPO acts and decisions by national courts → First instrument with binding rules on conflicts of jurisdiction 3. Spill-over effect for instance, in Spain the investigative judge has been abolished: "La aprobación del Reglamento (UE) 2017/1939 constituye el impulso definitivo a la reforma estructural del proceso penal español " - Future material competence → unanimity in the European Council - Regulation (EU) 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget.  Breaches of the rule of law shall affect "effective and timely cooperation with OLAF and, subject to the participation of the Member State concerned, with EPPO in their investigations or prosecutions pursuant to the applicable Union acts in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation" The EPPO And Non-Participating MS - Political / symbolic problem: the budget is a common good (+ NGEU) - No EPPO no money? - The EPPO cannot as such investigate/prosecute in NPMS, but may be competent for cases involving NPMS and therefore needs their support. Cooperation with NPMS:  In the absence of a legal instrument relating to cooperation in criminal matters and surrender between the EPPO and the competent authorities of the [NPMS], the Member States shall notify the EPPO as a competent authority for the purpose of implementation of the applicable Union acts on judicial cooperation in criminal matters in respect of cases falling within the competence of the EPPO, in their relations with [NPMS]. (Art. 105(3)) - Sincere cooperation? The EPPO and Third Countries - The EPPO needs to work in accordance with the existing acquis, at least until new agreements will be in place - Para. 3: International agreements concluded by the Union or to which the Union has acceded (United States, Japan, Norway/Iceland, United Kingdom)  "The Union, on its own behalf, hereby notifies the United Kingdom that the EPPO, in the exercise of its competences ..., shall be deemed to be a competent authority for the purposes of Title VIII [Mutual Assistance] of the [TCA]" / "competent authority for the purpose of making and, if appropriate, executing freezing requests..., as well as a central authority for the purpose of sending and answering to such requests". - Para. 4: notification of the EPPO as a competent authority under the existing multilateral agreements on judicial cooperation → 1959 Convention - Para. 5: EDPs cooperate on the basis of their national legislation (double hat International comity Conclusion  First EU body with direct powers vis-à-vis individuals in the sensitive field of criminal law → revolutionary step forward EU nature but strong national components  New model of judicial cooperation (or better, integration) within the EU  New system of criminal justice in some Member States (independence, mandatory prosecution, etc.)  New questions on the «Europeanisation à la carte»  [New <> and new challenges for the EU architecture]  New issues on the «extraterritoriality>> of EU law in the relations with third countries