Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-05-22-Speech-2-253-250"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120522.15.2-253-250"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Although the Treaty now formally contains the basis for new EU criminal law provisions, this does not mean that criminal law has become any less sensitive. The Treaty thus provides an emergency brake procedure, in case a Member State believes that proposed legislation affects fundamental aspects of its criminal justice system. This is an exceptional procedure in the Treaty. The EU approach to criminal law should be based on a realisation that criminal law is different from other legal domains in that, by definition, it restricts certain human rights and fundamental freedoms of an accused or convicted person. In many cases, the freedom of movement is restricted, but even if the offence is only punishable by fines, at least the right to property is restricted. In addition, practical considerations should also be borne in mind. A flurry of new EU initiatives in the field of substantive criminal law may easily overburden national administrations. Proposals must be of such a nature that they can be fully implemented and enforced. Resources of the national competent authorities are limited, especially during the current economic crisis. The danger exists that the adoption of new legislation will fail to produce better enforcement, thus undermining both the credibility and the efficiency of EU substantive criminal law."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples