The Sentence is Only the Beginning: Hiccups in the Cross-Border Execution of Judgments in the Euregion Meuse-Rhine

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
J. Keiler, A. Klip
{"title":"The Sentence is Only the Beginning: Hiccups in the Cross-Border Execution of Judgments in the Euregion Meuse-Rhine","authors":"J. Keiler, A. Klip","doi":"10.1163/15718174-bja10016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe cross-border execution of judgments remains difficult in practice for European Member States. This article seeks to analyze why this may be the case with regard to four different modalities of sentences: (1) prison sentences and other measures involving deprivation of liberty, (2) conditional sentences and alternative measures, (3) financial penalties and (4) confiscation orders. Based on a comparative analysis, this article investigates the problems at stake regarding the cross-border execution of judgements in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands and identifies possible causes and explanations for these. The analysis shows that impediments to cooperation may inter alia stem from differences in national law and diverging national sentencing practices and cultures and may furthermore be related to a lack of possibilities for cooperation in the preliminary phase of a transfer. Moreover, some obstacles to cooperation may be country-specific and self-made, due to specific choices and approaches of national criminal justice systems.","PeriodicalId":43762,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Crime Criminal Law and Criminal Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Crime Criminal Law and Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-bja10016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The cross-border execution of judgments remains difficult in practice for European Member States. This article seeks to analyze why this may be the case with regard to four different modalities of sentences: (1) prison sentences and other measures involving deprivation of liberty, (2) conditional sentences and alternative measures, (3) financial penalties and (4) confiscation orders. Based on a comparative analysis, this article investigates the problems at stake regarding the cross-border execution of judgements in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands and identifies possible causes and explanations for these. The analysis shows that impediments to cooperation may inter alia stem from differences in national law and diverging national sentencing practices and cultures and may furthermore be related to a lack of possibilities for cooperation in the preliminary phase of a transfer. Moreover, some obstacles to cooperation may be country-specific and self-made, due to specific choices and approaches of national criminal justice systems.
判决只是一个开始:欧洲默兹-莱茵河地区判决跨境执行的问题
对欧洲成员国来说,跨国界执行判决在实践中仍然很困难。本文试图分析为什么四种不同的判决方式会出现这种情况:(1)监禁判决和涉及剥夺自由的其他措施,(2)有条件判决和替代措施,(3)经济处罚和(4)没收令。本文在比较分析的基础上,调查了比利时、德国和荷兰跨国界执行判决的相关问题,并确定了这些问题的可能原因和解释。分析表明,阻碍合作的因素除其他外可能源于国家法律的差异以及不同的国家量刑做法和文化,还可能与在移交的初步阶段缺乏合作的可能性有关。此外,由于国家刑事司法系统的具体选择和方法,合作的一些障碍可能是针对具体国家和自行造成的。
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
12
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信