Skip to main content

National Models and International Frameworks

  • 978 Accesses

Part of the Critical Criminological Perspectives book series (CCRP)

Abstract

The eighth chapter places the four policing models against mafia and organised crime in Italy, US, Australia and UK, within international frameworks, with specific focus to contributions from the United Nations and the European Union. The aim of this chapter is to reflect on the challenges of policy transfer and harmonisation within a perspective that considers the problems of legal asymmetries for international cooperation. It reflects upon the internationalisation of labels such as mafia and organised crime and the difficulty to transfer these labels across national and international policies without an integration of cultural perspectives.

Keywords

  • Palermo convention
  • UNODC
  • European Union
  • Legal asymmetries
  • Policy transfer
  • Cultural relativism
  • Ethnocentrism

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-53568-5_8
  • Chapter length: 24 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-53568-5
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Notes

  1. 1.

    General Assembly Resolution 55/25 of 15 Nov. 2000. See also United Nations, “Interpretative notes for the official records (travaux préparatoires) of the negotiation of the United Convention against Transnational Organized Crime” A/55/383 Add. 1 of 3 Nov. 2000; UN Office on Drugs and Crime, “Travaux Préparatoires of the negotiations for the elaboration of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols thereto” (2006); UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Legislative Guides for the Implementation of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols thereto (2004).

  2. 2.

    Article 1 Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime

    Definitions

    For the purposes of this Framework Decision:

    1. “criminal organisation” means a structured association, established over a period of time, of more than two persons acting in concert with a view to committing offences which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order of a maximum of at least four years or a more serious penalty, to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit;

    2. “structured association” means an association that is not randomly formed for the immediate commission of an offence, nor does it need to have formally defined roles for its members, continuity of its membership, or a developed structure.

  3. 3.

    Convention based on Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) – Official Journal C 316, 27/11/1995 P. 0002 – 0032 – http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:41995A1127(01):EN:HTML.

  4. 4.

    Council Decision of 6 April 2009 establishing the European Police Office (Europol) OJ L 121, 15.5.2009 – http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32009D0371.

  5. 5.

    Tampere European Council 15 And 16 October 1999 Presidency Conclusions –

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/tam_en.htm.

  6. 6.

    Model Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Adopted by General Assembly resolution 45/117, subsequently amended by General Assembly resolution 53/112) A/RES/45/117 68th plenary meeting 14 December 1990, p.143, via https://www.unodc.org/pdf/model_treaty_mutual_assistance_criminal_matters.pdf.

  7. 7.

    EU Council Decision no. 12095/13.

  8. 8.

    Council Resolution Brussels, Creation of an operational network – @ON – to counter mafia- style serious and organised crime groups, Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting Brussels, 4 December 2014

  9. 9.

    Interpol, 11 June 2012 – Media release – Italy’s fight against mafia a blueprint against transnational organized crime, INTERPOL Chief tells Palermo meeting – http://www.interpol.int/News-and-media/News/2012/PR048.

  10. 10.

    Mispelled in the original text.

  11. 11.

    Press Release – European Parliament – MEPs demand new EU rules to improve fight against organised crime and corruption – Plenary sessions – page 1 – http://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdfs/news/expert/infopress/20161020IPR47883/20161020IPR47883_en.pdf.

  12. 12.

    European Parliament – Plenary Sitting – 7.10.2016 – REPORT on the fight against corruption and follow-up of the CRIM resolution (2015/2110(INI)) Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Rapporteur: Laura Ferrara – page 6 – http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bREPORT%2bA8-2016-0284%2b0%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN.

  13. 13.

    Ibid. page 10.

References

  • Bąkowski P. (2013a) The EU response to organised crime. Library Briefing. Brussels: Library of the European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bąkowski P. (2013b) Organised crime in the European Union. In: Parliament LotE (ed) Library Briefings. Brussels: European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beare ME and Woodiwiss M. (2014) U.S. organized crime control policies exported abroad. In: Paoli L (ed) The Oxford Handbook of Organized Crime. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borgers MJ. (2016) Confiscation of the proceeds of crime: The European union framework. In: King C and Walker C (eds) Dirty Assets: Emerging Issues in the Regulation of Criminal and Terrorist Assets. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calderoni F. (2012) A definition that does not work: The impact of the EU framework decision on the fight against organized crime. Common Market Law Review 49: 1365–1394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrapico H. (2014) Analysing the European Union’s responses to organized crime through different securitization lenses. European Security 23(4): 601–661.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Continiello A. (2016) Il delitto di associazione mafiosa a livello transnazionale – Proposta di risoluzione del Parlamento Europeo sulla lotta alla corruzione (Parlamento Europeo 2014–2019, 07/10/2016 A8-0284/2016). Giurisprudenza Penale Web 11: 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Europol. (2013) Threat assessment Italian organised crime. The Hague: Europol.

    Google Scholar 

  • FATF. ([2012] 2016) International standards on combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism & proliferation. The FATF Recommendations. Paris: Financial Action Task Force.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris-Short S. (2003) International human rights law: Imperialist, inept and ineffective? Cultural relativism and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Human Rights Quarterly 25(1): 130–181.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Interpol. (2014) Against organized crime. Interpol trafficking and counterfeiting casebook. Lyon: International Criminal Police Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joutsen M. (2005) International instruments on cooperation in responding to transnational crime. In: Reichel P (ed) Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karstedt S. (2001) Comparing cultures, comparing crime: Challenges, prospects and problems for a global criminology. Crime, Law and Social Change 36(3): 285–308.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Katan D. (2009) Translation as intercultural communication. In: Munday J (ed) The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavorgna A and Sergi A. (2016) Serious, therefore organised? A critique of the emerging “cyber-organised crime” rhetoric in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Cyber Criminology 10(2): 170–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsilegas V. (2001) Defining organised crime in the European Union: The limits of European Criminal Law in an area of freedom, security and justice. European Law Review 26: 565–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison S. (2002) Approaching organised crime: Where are we now and where are we going? Australian Institute of Criminology Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice 231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muncie J. (2005) The globalisation of crime control – the case of youth and juvenile justice: Neo-liberalism, policy convergence and international conventions. Theoretical Criminology 9(1): 35–64.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nelken D. (2011) Introduction: Comparative criminal justice and the challenge of globalisation. In: Nelken D (ed) Comparative Criminal Justice and Globalisation. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nord C. (1997) Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained, Manchester: St. Jerome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paoli L. (2002) The paradoxes of organized crime. Crime, Law and Social Change 37(1): 51–97.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sergi A. (2016) “Three Tales /Two Threats”. Prosecutors in Italy, England and the United States narrate national and transnational organised crime. In: Van Duyne PC, Sheinost M, Antonopoulos GA, et al. (eds) Narrative on Organises Crime in Europe. Criminals, Corrupters & Policy. Oisterwijk: Wolf Legal Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheptycki J, Ben Jaffel H and Bigo D. (2011) International organised crime in the European Union. In: Policies DGfI (ed) Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Brussels: European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2004a) Legislative guides for the implementation of the United Nations Convention against transnational organized crime and the protocol thereto. New York: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2004b) United Nations convention against corruption. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2004c) United Nations convention against transnational organized crime and the protocols thereto. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2009) Organised crime and trafficking in Eastern Africa. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2010) The globalization of crime. A transnational organized crime threat assessment. Vienna: United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2011) In-depth evaluation of the United Nations Global Programme against Money Laundering, Proceeds of Crime and the Financing of Terrorism (GPML). New York and Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNODC. (2012) Model legislative provisions against organized crime. New York: United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Government. (2016) Trafficking in Persons Report July 2015. Washington, DC.: Department of State.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whithorn N. (2014) Translating the mafia: Legal translation issues and strategies. The Journal of Specialised Translation 22: 157–173.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sergi, A. (2017). National Models and International Frameworks. In: From Mafia to Organised Crime. Critical Criminological Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53568-5_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53568-5_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-53567-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-53568-5

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)