Criminal procedures, preliminary references and judicial independence: A balancing act? Case C-564/19 IS
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221130468 |
| Published date | 01 October 2022 |
| Date | 01 October 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Case Notes |
Criminal procedures,
preliminary references and
judicial independence: A
balancing act? Case C-564/19 IS
Ágoston Mohay* and István Szijártó*
Abstract
In Case C-564/19 IS, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered a judgement on two sig-
nificant issues of EU law. First, it clarified the obligations of Member States under Directive 2010/64/
EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings regarding the provision of
linguistic assistance during the criminal procedure and the consequences of failure to adhere to them.
Second, it ruled on the EU-law conformity of national judicial decisions taken by higher courts which
can indirectly constrict the right of lower courts of a Member State to initiate preliminary ruling pro-
cedures before the CJEU. Thirdly, it held national measures where the referring judge is submitted to
a disciplinary procedure for referring a question to the CJEU contrary to EU law. The judgment builds
on and further develops the Court’s jurisprudence on preliminary rulings and judicial independence.
Keywords
Discretion of national courts under EU law, EU criminal law, judicial independence, preliminary
ruling procedure, procedural safeguards, standards of protection, translation and interpretation
in criminal procedures
1. Introduction
In Case C-564/19 IS,
1
the ECJ has delivered a judgment that concerns both EU criminal procedure
law and the preliminary ruling procedure in the context of judicial independence. This case note
sheds light on the importance of the judgment from both perspectives.
*
Department of International and European Law, Faculty of Law, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
Corresponding author:
Ágoston Mohay, Department of International and European Law, Faculty of Law, University of Pécs, 48-as tér 1. H-7622
Pécs, Hungary.
Email: mohay.agoston@ajk.pte.hu
Case Note
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law
2022, Vol. 29(5) 629–640
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1023263X221130468
maastrichtjournal.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial