Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Type of publication: Magistro darbas / Master thesis
Field of Science: Teisė / Law
Author(s): Poderskis, Edvardas
Title: Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismo praktikos įtaka Europos Sąjungos baudžiamajai politikai
Other Title: The influence of European Court's of Justice practice on European criminal policy
Extent: 33 p.
Date: 7-Jun-2018
Event: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Teisės fakultetas
Keywords: Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismo kompetencija;Valstybės suverenumas;Baudžiamoji politika;Criminal policy;States sovereignty;Competence of ECJ regarding criminal matters
Abstract: Magistro baigiamajame darbe „Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismo praktikos įtaka Europos Sąjungos baudžiamajai politikai“ nagrinėjama baudžiamosios politikos samprata, Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismo kompetencija baudžiamosios teisės sferoje Europos Sąjungos lygmeniu, taip pat, Teisingumo Teismo praktikos įtaka Europos Sąjungos baudžiamajai politikai. Nėra vieno tikslaus baudžiamosios politikos sampratos apibrėžimo, skirtingų šalių mokslininkai ši reiškinį apibūdina skirtingai, tačiau visuose apibrėžimuose yra panašumo, kas leidžia prieiti prie vienos tenkinančios išvados. Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismas kompetenciją baudžiamosios teisės sferos įgavo po to, kai buvo priimta Mastrichto sutartis. Sąlyginai maža, apsiribojanti trečiajame „tarpvalstybiniame“ Europos Sąjungos ramstyje jurisdikcija, tačiau tai buvo vienas iš pirmųjų žingsnių siekiant formuoti Europos Sąjungos baudžiamąją politiką. Darbo objektas yra Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismo praktika, jos įtaka formuojant Europos Sąjungos baudžiamąją politiką ir kaip tai paveikia valstybes nares ir jų nacionalinę baudžiamąją teisę. Detaliai išanalizavus mokslinę literatūrą, mokslinius straipsnius ir Teisingumo Teismo praktiką, darytina išvada, kad savo praktika darydamas įtaką Europos Sąjungos baudžiamajai politikai ir taip paveikdamas valstybių narių nacionalinę baudžiamąją teisę Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismas tarsi pažeidžia valstybių narių suverenitetą. Taip pat, remiantis valdžių padalijimo principu, kyla argumentas, kad teismai neformuoja politikos, ši rolė priklauso įstatymų leidžiamajai ir vykdomajai valdžiai, o teismo praktika turėtu būti tik baudžiamosios politikos indikatorius. Tačiau kaip bebūtų, skirtingų valdžių funkcijos papildo vieną kitą ir yra persipynusios, todėl toks ESTT kišimasis į valstybių narių nacionalinę baudžiamąją teisę yra neišvengiamas siekiant efektyviai įgyvendinti Europos Sąjungos užsibrėžtų tikslų, baudžiamosios teisės srityse (ir ne tik baudžiamosios teisės srityse, tačiau panaudojant baudžiamąsias sankcijas, siekiant užtikrinti efektyvų tikslų įgyvendinimą).
One of the most important aspects analyzed in the Master thesis named “The influence of European Court’s of Justice practice on European criminal policy” is the influence of ECJ practice on European criminal policy and its effect on the members states of the European Union and their national criminal law. ECJ is a unique institution that cannot exactly be compared to other judicial courts, because ECJ does not act as a court of appeal or a final court, thus, it does not typically “decide” cases. Nevertheless, ECJ judgments have some general precedent value, since a reference in a later case may be denied on the basis that the question has already been decided by the ECJ. Since the Court merely interprets EU law, it’s judgments are generally considered to affect the interpretation of that law from the moment that the law came into force. The Court’s judgment containing the correct interpretation is merely declaratory of how the law has always been, unless the Court decides to limit the temporal effects of the interpretation. Indeed European Court of Justice is in a unique position to influence the criminal policy of the European Union. The object of this thesis is the case law of European Court of Justice in contrast to its ever growing competence regarding criminal matters in European Union. The aim of the thesis is as follows: based on the scientific literature, articles and ECJ case law to define what exactly criminal policy is, to determine the reach of ECJ jurisdiction regarding criminal matters before and after Lisbon treaty came into force, to determine how does ECJ practice influence European criminal policy and if by doing so it breaches member states sovereignty. The methods of scientific literature analysis, legal analysis, comparison, generalization and interpretation are used in the thesis. The raised hypothesis in this thesis is that European Court of Justice by influencing European criminal policy and in by doing so having a both negative and positive effect on member states national criminal provisions does breach the sovereignty of the member states. The Master thesis consists of three parts. The first part of the thesis defines in detail what exactly criminal policy is. This part explains the many difficulties in defining criminal policy, including the difference of opinion among the scientists and the different expressions used in different languages which also gives different assumptions on what criminal policy exactly is. In its widest sense, criminal policy refers to all actions that have an effect on criminality. The second part of the thesis defines in detail the jurisdiction of the ECJ regarding criminal matters before and after Lisbon treaty came into force. This part shows the struggle of the Court inside the old third pillar of European Union and how things changed over time with European legislator giving more and more powers to ECJ regarding criminal law. The third part of the thesis presents the analysis of the practice of ECJ. This part raises the problematic aspects for the ECJ when passing judgments regarding disputes between national provisions and Union law and also between institutional disputes. The final thesis aims to investigate as closely as possible the influence ECJ practice has on European criminal policy and the negative and positive effect on member states national criminal provisions and emphasize ECJ’s obvious attempts to gain jurisdiction over the criminal matters in European Union. The theory of international criminal law emphasizes that national criminal law is like an expression of states sovereignty. So in theory any kind of attempt to influence or regulate national criminal provisions from outside could be considered the breach of states sovereignty. Also according to the theory of criminal law judicial courts do not take part in the development of political policies and are merely an indicator of it. A thorough analysis of scientific literature, articles and case law has led to conclude that European Court of Justice does influence European criminal policy and by doing so does in fact breach members states sovereignty in a way by influencing European criminal policy, however that being said it is important to point out that different functions of different institutions are interconnected and complement each other, meaning this kind of breach of member states sovereignty by the ECJ is unavoidable and in fact is necessary to ensure the effective implementation of a European Union policies regarding criminal law (and not only criminal law, but using the criminal sanctions for the breach of Union law regarding other matters for the effective implementation). Also conclusions have been made that in institutional disputes the Court will most likely support supranational institutions to the expense of the intergovernmental European Union Council. Final conclusions would be that the hypothesis raised in this thesis is partially true.
Appears in Collections:2018 m. (TF mag.)

Files in This Item:
edvardas_poderskis_md.pdf427.83 kBAdobe PDF   Restricted AccessView/Open   Request a copy

Show full item record

Page view(s)

checked on Oct 13, 2019


checked on Oct 13, 2019

Google ScholarTM


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.