Case Law Trend: The Question of Interaction Between the Tax and Criminal Proceedings in the ECtHR Case-Law

IF 1.2 Q2 LAW
Intertax Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.54648/taxi2022063
Barış Bahçeci, Demirhan Burak Çelik
{"title":"Case Law Trend: The Question of Interaction Between the Tax and Criminal Proceedings in the ECtHR Case-Law","authors":"Barış Bahçeci, Demirhan Burak Çelik","doi":"10.54648/taxi2022063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This objective of this study is to analyse the definition and the application of the concept of sufficiently close in substance and in time by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in terms of tax penalties. The Court implements this concept in Article 4 of the Protocol Number 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and intends to regulate the interaction between the two sets of (tax and criminal) procedures that deal with the penalization of the same matter. The progress of the case law is examined from the Glantz and Nykänen judgments in 2014 and the Kristjansson judgment in 2021. Two research questions are addressed: What is the connection in substance, and what is the connection in time? For the first question, the case law points out that the connection in substance requires the repetition in collection evidence. However, the boundaries of the relationship that should be established between the two sets of proceedings are uncertain and debatable. For the second question, the temporal connection has not yet been defined in case law, and its application overlaps with the scope of the right to a fair trial. Thus, it is seen that the boundaries in the both contexts need to be redrawn in order to eliminate the current ambivalence.\nECtHR case-law, interaction between proceedings, connection in substance, connection in time, ne bis in idem, tax penalty, tax procedure, right to a fair trial.","PeriodicalId":45365,"journal":{"name":"Intertax","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intertax","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2022063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This objective of this study is to analyse the definition and the application of the concept of sufficiently close in substance and in time by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in terms of tax penalties. The Court implements this concept in Article 4 of the Protocol Number 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and intends to regulate the interaction between the two sets of (tax and criminal) procedures that deal with the penalization of the same matter. The progress of the case law is examined from the Glantz and Nykänen judgments in 2014 and the Kristjansson judgment in 2021. Two research questions are addressed: What is the connection in substance, and what is the connection in time? For the first question, the case law points out that the connection in substance requires the repetition in collection evidence. However, the boundaries of the relationship that should be established between the two sets of proceedings are uncertain and debatable. For the second question, the temporal connection has not yet been defined in case law, and its application overlaps with the scope of the right to a fair trial. Thus, it is seen that the boundaries in the both contexts need to be redrawn in order to eliminate the current ambivalence. ECtHR case-law, interaction between proceedings, connection in substance, connection in time, ne bis in idem, tax penalty, tax procedure, right to a fair trial.
判例法走向:ECtHR判例法中的税务与刑事诉讼互动问题
本研究的目的是分析欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)在税务处罚方面对实质和时间上足够接近概念的定义和应用。法院在《欧洲人权公约》第7号议定书第4条中落实了这一概念,并打算规范处理同一事项处罚的两套(税务和刑事)程序之间的相互作用。从2014年的Glantz和Nykänen判决以及2021年的Kristjansson判决中可以看出判例法的进展。提出了两个研究问题:什么是实质上的联系,什么是时间上的联系?对于第一个问题,判例法指出,实质上的联系需要收集证据的重复。然而,这两套程序之间应建立的关系的界限是不确定的,也是有争议的。关于第二个问题,判例法尚未界定时间联系,其适用与公平审判权的范围重叠。因此,可以看出,这两种情况下的界限都需要重新划定,以消除当前的矛盾心理。ECtHR判例法,诉讼程序之间的相互作用,实质上的联系,时间上的联系、一罪不二审、税务处罚、税务程序、公平审判权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intertax
Intertax LAW-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
50.00%
发文量
45
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信