Abstract
Focusing on the criminal law cooperation ESTABLISHED in the European Union, the Member States have been progressively developing a common policy with the aim to create instruments to combat the international crime and to develop new forms of legal assistance. These instruments include not only the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and the European Evidence Warrant (EEW), but also the initiative for a directive on the European Investigation Order (EIO). However, building an organic system in EU means overcoming the obstructive effects of multicultural and multilingual pluralism.
The initiative for an EIO presents not only procedural questions but also many problems of languages to be analysed. The specific problems of the translation of legal terminology are caused by the system's specificity of the legal language. This critical condition underlines the importance to create initiatives for judicial cooperation in criminal law, attending to judicial and linguistic significance of diverse terms in all the languages of the European Union.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The beginning of the new Millennium was marked by terrible terrorist attacks against the United States on 11 September 2001, followed by the tragic bomb outrages in Madrid on 11 March 2004 and London on 7 July 2005.
- 2.
The reference is to the lucid observations of Ruggieri (2010), p. 529 ff.
- 3.
Pisani (2007), p. 388 ff.
- 4.
Parisi (2010), p. 483.
- 5.
Framework Decision (FWD) on the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), OJEU 2002, L 190/1.
- 6.
Framework Decision (FWD) on the European Evidence Warrant (EEW), OJEU 2008, L 350/72.
- 7.
In this regard, see Campailla (2011), p. 90 ff.
- 8.
Bauman memorably described Europe as the “motherland of permanent translation”: see Bauman (2006), p. 90.
- 9.
Buzzelli (2005), p. 710.
- 10.
On this theme, see Ruggieri (2006), p. 1234.
- 11.
The principle of the mutual recognition of convictions and judicial decision was deemed “fundamental” for judicial cooperation for the first time by the European Council of Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999; see http://ec.europa.eu/archives/european-council/index_en.htm .
- 12.
The Stockholm Programme, which replaces the Hague Programme, was adopted on 10 December 2009 and published in the OJEU on 4 May 2010, C/115/01, and is “a working agenda” for Member States for the period 2010–2014. It sets out measures to be taken to “ensure respect for fundamental rights and freedoms and integrity of the person while guaranteeing security in Europe” (Article 1.1). A meticulous examination of different means for sharing information, which is essential for the strengthening of judicial and police cooperation, is offered by Di Paolo (2010), p. 1969 ff.
- 13.
Initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Bulgaria, the Republic of Estonia, the Kingdom of Spain, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Slovenia, and the Kingdom of Sweden for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters (2010/C 165/02), OJEU 2010, C 165/22.
- 14.
- 15.
OJEU 2002, L 190/1.
- 16.
OJEU 2008, L 350/72.
- 17.
OJEU 2000, C 197/1.
- 18.
See Zimmermann et al. (2011), pp. 56–80.
- 19.
The plan for the implementation of the Stockholm Program of 20 April 2010, COM (2010) 171 final, is available at http://www.europa.eu .
- 20.
The Green Paper on Obtaining Evidence in Criminal Matters from One Member State to Another and Securing Its Admissibility, COM (2009) 624 final, is available at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/news/consulting_public/news_consulting_0004_en.htm .
- 21.
The Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the rights to information in criminal proceedings of 22 May 2012, OJEU 2012, L 142/1.
- 22.
The expression and, more generally, the observation is contained in the Resolution of the Second Select Committee (Justice) of the Senate, approved in the first afternoon session of 2 March 2011, Rapporteur R. Centenaro, available at http://www.senato.it .
- 23.
Selvaggi (2010), p. 543 ff.
- 24.
Pommer (2008), p. 17; Ajani-Rossi (2006), p. 124, who report that the “difficulty of organising a uniform terminology in legal matters, which does not apply in Physics, Economics and other sciences, the lack of correspondence between terms that are used in different local cultures and the fact that the refer to ‘external’ objects: law shapes reality through instruments of cultural communication”.
- 25.
Pommer (2005), p. 376 ff.
- 26.
- 27.
In this regard, see Ruggieri (2012).
- 28.
On this topic, see Chiavario (2001) passim.
- 29.
As described by Ruggieri (2012).
- 30.
Ibidem.
- 31.
Pisani (2011), p. 6.
- 32.
Abbreviations
- EAW:
-
European Arrest Warrant
- EEW:
-
European Evidence Warrant
- EIO:
-
European Investigation Order
- EU:
-
European Union
- FWD:
-
Framework Decision
- OJ:
-
Official Journal of the European Union
- TFEU:
-
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
References
Ajani G, Rossi P (2006) Coerenza del diritto privato europeo e multilinguismo. In: Pozzo B and Jacometti V (ed) Le politiche linguistiche delle istituzioni comunitarie dopo l’allargamento. Redazione, traduzione e interpretazione degli atti giuridici comunitari e il loro impatto sull’armonizzazione del diritto europeo. Giuffrè, Milan, p 119 ff
Bauman Z (2006) L’Europa è un’avventura. Laterza, Rome
Beccaria GL (2008) Tra le pieghe delle parole. Einaudi, Milan
Buzzelli S (2005) Processo penale europeo. In: Enciclopedia del Diritto - Aggiornamento I. Giuffrè, Milan, p 710 ff
Campailla S (2011) La “circolazione” giudiziaria europea dopo Lisbona. In: Processo penale e Giustizia, No. 2, p 90 ff
Cavini S (1999) La pubblica accusa nei diversi Stati dell’Unione europea: breve rapporto sui principi vigenti in Italia, Francia, Germania, Gran Bretagna e Spagna. In: Rivista italiana di diritto pubblico comunitario, p 302 ff
Chiavario M (ed) (2001) Procedure penali d’Europa. Cedam, Padova
De Amicis G (2010) L’ordine europeo di indagine penale. www.europea-rights.eu. Accessed 15 June 2010
Di Paolo G (2010) La circolazione dei dati personali nello spazio giudiziario europeo dopo Prüm. In: Cassazione penale, p 1969 ff
Parisi N (2010) Su taluni limiti dell’attività di ricerca e acquisizione della prova penale di reati informatici (ancora a proposito del preteso conflitto tra esigenze della sovranità e rigetto dei diritti della persona). In: Corso P, Zanetti E (eds) Studi in onore di Mario Pisani, vol II. La Tribuna, Piacenza, p 443 ff
Perrodet V (2001) Quante figure di pubblico ministero. In: Chiavario M (ed) Procedure penali d’Europa. Cedam, Padova, pp 393–406
Pisani M (2007) Il “processo penale europeo”: problemi e prospettive. In: Pisani M (ed) Nuovi temi e casi di procedura penale internazionale. Giuffrè, Milan, p 388 ff
Pisani MM (2011) Problemi di prova in materia penale. La proposta di direttiva sull’Ordine Europeo di Indagine. In: Archivio penale, No. 3, p 1 ff
Pommer SE (2005) Cultural Competency in Legal Translation: How Comparative Law Knowledge Influences Legal Translation Strategies. In: Congress Proceedings, Fedorov Readings-VII, St. Petersburg, p 376 ff
Pommer SE (2008) Translation as Intercultural Transfer: The Case of Law. Skase J Transl Interpretation 3(1):17
Pulito L (2010) La circolazione della prova penale in Europa dopo il Trattato di Lisbona. In: Giustizia penale, Part I, column 381 ff
Ruggieri F (2006) Processo penale e multilinguismo nell’Unione europea. Spunti per alcune riflessioni introduttive. In: Cassazione penale, No. 12, p 1234
Ruggieri F (2010) Di un “Processo penale europeo” ovvero di una “civitas magna” in costruzione, In: Corso P, Zanetti E (eds) Studi in onore di Mario Pisani, vol II. La Tribuna, Piacenza, p 529 ff
Ruggieri F (2012) L’italiano giuridico che cambia: il caso della procedura penale. In: Cass pen 3, p 1131
Selvaggi E (2010) “L’arabo, il parto, il siro in suo sermon l’udì”: riflessioni sulla babele delle lingue nei rapporti giurisdizionali con autorità straniere. In: Corso P, Zanetti E (eds) Studi in onore di Mario Pisani, vol II. La Tribuna, Piacenza, pp 543–560
Zanzotto A (1995) Europa, melograno di lingue. Einaudi, Milano
Zimmermann F, Glaser S, Motz A (2011) Mutual Recognition and Its Implications for the Gathering of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: A Critical Analysis of the Initiative for a European Investigation Order. Eur Crim Law Rev (1):56–80
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Camaldo, L. (2014). The European Investigation Order. In: Ruggieri, F. (eds) Criminal Proceedings, Languages and the European Union. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37152-3_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37152-3_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-37151-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-37152-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)