What Do We Need to Resolve after Establishing the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in the Slovak Republic?

Keywords: European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), Implementation at national level, Functioning at national level, Law enforcement authority, Mutual recognition

Abstract

Establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is a result of the European Union’s initiatives as a consequence of the fraud against its financial interests. Many questions beg consideration at the EU level as well as at national level of all EU Member States, including the Slovak Republic. The aim of the paper is the assessment of Slovak understanding of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The article’s focus comprises five crucial issues that need to be resolved in Slovakia. The first section points out at the process of adoption and implementation of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Consequently, the following section tackles with the question whether the European Public Prosecutor’s Office could be considered a law enforcement authority at national level. The third section is focused on number of the European delegated prosecutors and related competence and jurisdiction. While the fourth section is focused on the execution of evidence in criminal proceedings, the fifth section is focused on application of mutual recognition. At the outset of the contribution, the historical method of research was used, namely in regard to the genesis of the EPPO. The most frequently used method was the analytical method of research. This method was used in regard to the analyses and assessments of literary sources, legislation and implementation of electronic monitoring. Another frequently used method was the comparative method of research. Further, the synthetic method of research was used. Information gathered in order to elaborate the contribution was collected in particular through the three following gathering techniques. The first data gathering method was the review of scientific literature; the works of renowned authors was analysed. The second data gathering method was access to legislation. It should be highlighted that not only consolidated legislation was used, but also original versions were analysed, in particular in the case of historical issues. Third, research into official documents of European organisations was conducted, in particular documents of the European Union.

References

ARMSTRONG, K. (2002). Mutual Recognition. In: BARNARD, C., SCOTT, J. eds. The Law of the Single European Market: Unpacking the Premises. Oxford – Portland: Hart Publishing. 2002. pp. 225-268.
BARANÍK, K. (2020). Ústava na hviezdnom nebi: Vzťah Ústavy Slovenskej republiky k medzinárodnému právu. Prague: Leges, 2020. 296 pp.
CHRENŠŤ, J., NESVADBA, A. (2020). Právo Európskej únie. Bratislava: Akadémia Policajného zboru v Bratislave, 2020. 328 pp.
DRGONEC, J. (2019). Ústava Slovenskej republiky: Komentár. 2nd edition. Bratislava: C. H. Beck, 2019. 1792 pp.
ERKELENS, L. H., MEIJ, A. W. H., PAWLIK, M. eds. (2015). The European Public Prosecutor’s Office: An extended arm or a Two-Headed dragon? The Hague: T. M. C. Asser Press, 2015. 285 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-035-0.
FERENČÍKOVÁ, S. (2020). Skúmanie konkrétnych možností, limitov a perspektív ukladania trestu odňatia slobody v neštátnych ústavoch na výkon trestu odňatia slobody v Slovenskej republike vzhľadom na právne a mimoprávne záruky zákonnosti. In: Štát a právo. Vol. 7, No. 4, 2020. pp. 300-336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/sap.2020.7.4.300-336.
FUNTA, R. (2014). Vybrané otázky medzinárodného práva verejného a súkromného. Brno: Tribun, 2014. 274 pp.
FUNTA, R., GOLOVKO, L., JURIŠ, F. (2020). Európa a európske právo. 2nd edition. Brno, MSD, 2020. 445 pp.
GEELHOED, W., ERKELENS, L. H., MEIJ, A. W. H. eds. (2018). Shifting Perspectives on the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The Hague: T. M. C. Asser Press, 2018. 198 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-216-3.
IVOR, J., POLÁK, P., ZÁHORA, J. (2021). Trestné právo procesné I: Všeobecná časť. 2nd edition. Bratislava: Wolters Kluwer, 2021. 596 pp.
JÁGER, R. (2019). Dejiny štátu a práva na území Slovenska do roku 1848. Banská Bystrica: Belianum, 2019. 194 pp.
JANSSENS, CH. (2013). The Principle of Mutual Recognition in EU Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. 358 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199673032.001.0001.
KERBER, W., VAN DEN BERGH, R. (2012). Mutual Recognition in the Global Trade Regime: Lessons from the EU Experience. In: LIANOS, I., ODUDU, O. eds. Regulating Trade in Services in the EU and the WTO: Trust, Distrust and Economic Integration. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. pp. 121-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022118.007.
KLÁTIK, J., DESET, M., KLIMEK, L. (2019). Európska prokuratúra a perspektívy jej činnosti pri ochrane finančných záujmov EÚ. Prague: Leges, 2019. 144 pp.
KLÁTIK, J., KLIMEK, L. (2020) Implementation of Electronic Monitoring of Sentenced Persons in the Slovak Republic. In: Sociopolitical Sciences. Vol. 10, No. 5, 2020. pp. 59-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33693/2223-0092-2020-10-5-59-75.
KLIMEK, L. (2017). Mutual Recognition of Judicial Decisions in European Criminal Law. Cham: Springer, 2017. 742 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44377-5.
KMEC, J. (2006). Evropské trestní právo. Mechanizmy europeizace trestního práva a vytváření skutečného evropského trestního práva. Praha: C. H. Beck, 2006. 217 pp.
LIGETI, K., ANTUNES, M. J., GIUFFRIDA, F. (2000). The European Public Prosecutor’s Office at Launch. Milano: Wolters Kluwer, 2000. 236 pp.
MEDELSKÝ, J. (2017). Medzinárodná bezpečnosť. Bratislava: Akadémia Policajného zboru, 2017. 289 pp.
MENCEROVÁ, I. et al. (2015). Trestné právo hmotné: Všeobecná časť. 2nd edition. Šamorín: Heuréka, 2015. 501 pp.
ONDROVÁ, J. (2020). Verejnosť ako strážca spravodlivého výkonu súdnej moci. In: Štát a právo. Vol. 7, No. 1, 2020. pp. 63-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/sap.2020.7.1.63-74.
SAKTOROVÁ, Ľ. (2020). Teoretické vymedzenie konceptu globálnej občianskej spoločnosti v kontexte medzinárodných vzťahov a medzinárodného práva. In: Štát a právo. Vol. 7, No. 4, 2020. pp. 337-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/sap.2020.7.4.337-383.
SCHMIDT, S. (2008). Mutual Recognition as a New Mode of Governance. Oxon – New York: Routledge, 2008. 174 pp.
SKALOŠ, M. (2020). Dejiny štátu a práva na území Slovenska 2 (1848 – 1948). Banská Bystrica: Belianum, 2020. 410 pp.
ŠRAMEL, B. (2010). Európsky verejný žalobca. In: Akademiké akcenty: Conference proceedings. Bratislava: Pan-European University, 2010. pp. 221-237.
ŠRAMEL, B. (2011). Európsky verejný prokurátor – nevyhnutný ochranca Európy? In: Justičná revue. Vol. 63, No. 1, 2011. pp. 95-108.
ŠRAMEL, B. (2011a). Ústavné zakotvenie verejnej žaloby v Českej republike a Slovenskej republike: komparatívne zhodnotenie. In: Státní zastupitelství. Vol. 11, No. 5, 2011. pp. 48-55.
ŠRAMEL, B. (2011b). Verejná žaloba na území Slovenskej republiky v historickom kontexte. In: Státní zastupitelství. Vol. 9, No. 11, 2011. pp. 23-34.
VERMEULEN, G., DE BONDT, W., VAN DAMME, Y. (2010). EU Cross-Border Gathering and Use of Evidence in Criminal Matters: Towards Mutual Recognition of Investigative Measures and Free Movement of Evidence? Antwerpen – Apeldoorn – Portland: Maklu, 2010. 254 pp.
WINTER, L. B. ed. (2018). The European Public Prosecutor’s Office: The Challenges Ahead. Cham: Springer, 2018. 279 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93916-2.
ZWIERS, M. W. (2011). The European Public Prosecutor’s Office: Analysis of a Multilevel Criminal Justice System. Cambridge: Intersentia, 2011. 503 pp.
Published
2021-06-30
How to Cite
Deset, M., & Klimek, L. (2021, June 30). What Do We Need to Resolve after Establishing the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in the Slovak Republic?. Slovak Journal of Political Sciences, 21(1). Retrieved from https://sjps.fsvucm.sk/index.php/sjps/article/view/206