Speeches by
| Published date | 01 December 2015 |
| Date | 01 December 2015 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/203228441500600404 |
| Subject Matter | Session 1: Introductory Session |
410 Intersentia
SPEECH
G M*
I would like to welcome and thank the Authorities and everyone present here for
having accepted the invitation of the Ministry of Justice to this conference that has
been promoted and organised by the Ita lian Presidency and by the European
Commission in par tnership with the LUISS Guido Carl i University. I wou ld therefore
like to thank the University’s Rector, Professor Massimo Egidi, and the Pro-Rec tor,
Professor Paola Severino, for hosting us i n this prestigious setti ng, and also address a
special tha nks to the Vice-President of the Europe an Commission, Fra ns Timmermans ,
expressing to him my best w ishes for a successful mandate.
e inspiration for this conference ca me from a common consideration within the
Presidency Trio – formed by Italy, Latvia and Lu xembourg – while preparing the Trio
programme. It was commonly felt that it wa s necessary to investigate how the Court
of Justice had shaped – and wil l shape even more in the future – the principles and t he
rules in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. And so, in the lig ht of the
fundamental role t hat the Court has had i n the past development of the ideal of
European integration, as wel l as developing clear rules that have somehow been
revolutionary for the development of the Europea n Communities rst, and of the
European Union today, the question arose of how this ac tion will re ect on the
“younger” policy of the Union, and in pa rticular on the creation of a common a rea of
justice.
is question became even more pressing when we star ted to wonder about the
future development of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice in view of the
adoption of the conclusions of next June’s European Council. If we want to imagine
what the future guidelines should be, so as to prioritise and make e ective – giving
added value to – the Union’s action in this eld, and more speci cally i n the eld of
justice, we cannot avoid exami ning what the Court has taught us on thi s subject.
erefore, it was decided to carry out a comparison “ in three par ts”, where each
member of the Presidency Trio was going to exami ne in detail a speci c issue. Time-
related considerations “naturally” led to t he issue of the expiry of the Lisbon Treaty’s
transitional per iod, provided in Protocol No. 36 to that Treaty, being assigned to the
Italian Presidency.
* Head of Cabinet of the It alian Minis ter of Justice.
To continue reading
Request your trial