Towards the end of mutual trust? Prison conditions in the context of the European Arrest Warrant and the transfer of prisoners framework decisions
| Author | TP Marguery |
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X18818662 |
| Published date | 01 December 2018 |
| Date | 01 December 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Towards the end of mutual
trust? Prison conditions in the
context of the European Arrest
Warrant and the transfer of
prisoners framework decisions
TP Marguery*
Abstract
This article contends that the presumption of mutual trust between the European Union Member
States is a legalfiction. In the context oftransfer of a custodial sentencefrom one country to another
based on mutual recognition and mutual trust, a failure of the latter can have detrimental effects on
judicial cooperation and, especially, on the functionsof punishment. In particular,mutual recognition
and mutual trust createa bridge between the external limits of punishment (fundamentalrights) and
the internallimits to thefunctions of punishment(retribution,deterrence and rehabilitation). The non-
compliance with individuals’ fundamental rights undermines the very social functions of punishment.
Such a failure can only be prevented if the Member States and the European Union endeavour to
establish and maintain a truly integrated penal policy with concerns for individuals at its very core.
Keywords
European Arrest Warrant, fundamental rights, mutual trust, punishment, transfer of sentences
persons
1. Introduction
In the European Union (EU) the transfer of a custodial sentence from one country to another, based
on the Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant (FD EAW)
1
and on the Framework
* Assistant Professor, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
Corresponding author:
TP Marguery, Utrecht University, Newtonlaan 201, Utrecht, 3584 BH, Netherlands.
E-mail: t.p.marguery@uu.nl
1. Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the EAW and the surrender procedures between
Member States, [2002] OJ L 190/1 (FD EAW).
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law
2018, Vol. 25(6) 704–717
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1023263X18818662
maastrichtjournal.sagepub.com
MJ
MJ
To continue reading
Request your trial