Activities of Morten PETERSEN related to 2023/0093(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transfer of proceedings in criminal matters
Amendments (14)
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
(a) a judge, court, investigating judge, suspect, accused, the legal advisor of a suspect or accused person, or public prosecutor competent in the case concerned; or
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
In the case of a revival of a suspended proceeding, that proceeding must be subject to judicial review in order to ensure that there is an independent assessment of whether a violation of the ne bis in idem principle arises.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The right to a legal remedy shall be exercised before a court in the requested State in accordance with its law and may also be exercised before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The suspect or accused person and their legal advisors shall be kept informed of developments in relation to any request, provided that it would not undermine the confidentiality of an investigation.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
A decision to withdraw the request by a requesting authority should be amenable to judicial review.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. In any of the situations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, before deciding to refuse the transfer of criminal proceedings, either in whole or in part, the requested authority shall consult the requesting authority and, where necessary, shall request it to provide any necessary information without delay. Moreover, the suspect or accused person and their legal advisors shall be kept informed of developments in relation to any request, provided that it would not undermine the confidentiality of an investigation
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Any decision to refuse a transfer shall be amenable to judicial review in both national courts and the CJEU.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. The suspect or accused person and their legal advisors shall be kept informed of consultations in relation to any request, provided that it would not undermine the confidentiality of an investigation.
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall bear its own costs of transfers of criminal proceedings resulting from the application of this Regulation. Including but not limited to the legal aid that a suspect or accused person has the right to in each Member State.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. The requesting authority may continue or reopen criminal proceedings, if the requested authority informs it of its decision to discontinue criminal proceedings related to the facts underlying the request for transfer of criminal proceedings, unless that decision, under the national law of the requested State, definitively bars further prosecution and therefore prevents further criminal proceedings, in respect of the same acts, in the requested State.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Any decision to reopen a case shall be amenable to judicial review in both national courts and the CJEU.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Evidence transferred by the requesting authority shall not be denied admission in criminal proceedings in the requested State on the mere ground that the evidence was gathered in another Member State. The evidence gathered in the requesting State according to the lex loci may be used in criminal proceedings in the requested State, provided that the admissibility of such evidence is not contrary to the fundamental principles of law of the requested State. Member States shall ensure that there are effective remedies in place to assess the admissibility of evidence. The requested State shall take into account a successful remedy against the production or transmission of the evidence in the State where the evidence was gathered.
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
The requested authority shall inform the requesting authority and the suspect or accused person and their legal advisors of the discontinuation of criminal proceedings or of any decision delivered at the end of the criminal proceedings, including whether that decision, under the national law of the requested State, definitively bars further prosecution and therefore prevents further criminal proceedings, in respect of the same acts, in that State or of other information of substantial value. It shall forward a copy of the written decision delivered at the end of the criminal proceedings to the requesting authority and the suspect or accused person and their legal advisors.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall make the information received under paragraph 1 publicly available and up-to-date, either on a dedicated website or on the unrestricted area of the website of the European Judicial Network created by the Council Decision 2008/976/JHA76 . _________________ 76 Council Decision 2008/976/JHA of 16 December 2008 on the European Judicial Network (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 130).