Effectiveness and Constitutional Limits in European Criminal Law
| Author | Ester Herlin-Karnell |
| DOI | 10.1177/203228441400500302 |
| Published date | 01 September 2014 |
| Date | 01 September 2014 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
New Journal of Eu ropean Crimina l Law, Vol. 5, Issue 3, 2014 267
ARTICLES
EFFECTIVENESS AND CONSTITUTIONAL
LIMITS IN EUROPEAN CRIMINAL LAW*
E H-K**
ABSTRACT
is introductory article o ers an account of how the principle of ‘e ectiveness’ in EU
law has shaped the develo pment of EU criminal law. I will try to explain why e ectiveness
reasoning has played an important function in the development and formation of EU
criminal law as well a s the dangers and merits with e ectiveness in EU context.
Keywords: AFSJ; competence, e ectiveness; jurisdiction
1. INTRODUCTION
e pri nciple of e ecti veness has had a remarkable career in EU law and can be trac ed
back to the early days of the EU genesis . e starting p oint when discussing e ectiveness
in EU law is o en the cla ssic EU story of how the Union has supranationalised parts of
national law by insisting on its complia nce with the EU principle of (full) e ectiveness.
e force of e ectiveness was evident from early on in the EU’s history. Famously,
among the EU foundational cases, the Francovich case told us that state liability was
inh erent in the Treat y so as to ensu re the f ull e ecti veness of EU law.1 In the ea rly days
when the Court of Justice had to establish the autonomous European legal order, the
basic message had always been that EU law would be deprived of its e ectiveness
unless EU law was enforced and nationa l law set aside. More recent cases such as the
Mangold2 and Kükükdeveci3 rulings demonstrate that the force behind the doctrine of
e ectiveness is far from tuned out and sti ll very much a living EU law concept.
* Paper presented at Helsin ki University EU crim inal law workshop, 26 Octobe r 2012. anks to the
organiszers a nd participa nts for useful com ments, with th e usual discla imer. e paper has retai ned
the charact er of an oral presentation.
** Professor of EU const itutional law and just ice at the VU University Ams terdam.
1 Cases C-6 a nd C-9/90 Francovich, [1991] ECR 1–5357.
2 Case C-144/04, Mangol d v Helm [2005] ECR I-9981.
3 Case C-555/0 7 Kükükdeveci, [2010] ECR I-5769.
To continue reading
Request your trial