TY - JOUR
T1 - Normative justifications of EU criminal law
T2 - European public goods and transnational interests
AU - Öberg, Jacob
N1 - Funding Information:
Professor in European Union Law, University of Southern Denmark; Associate Professor in Law, Örebro University, Sweden; Visiting Fellow, Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Governance, Netherlands; [email protected] . This article is the outcome of discussions with many academic colleagues and friends, particularly during presentations of early drafts of this article in Copenhagen and online seminars organised by the University of Oxford, Örebro University, University of South Wales and Brunel University London. I would wish to particularly acknowledge the valuable comments, suggestions and constructive criticisms from Valsamis Mitsilegas, Ermioni Xanthopoulou, Shai Dothan, Michal Krajewski, Gerard Conway, Isabella Mancini, Nina Persák, Jannemieke Ouwerkerk, Helena Farrand Carrapico, Joana de Deus Pereira, Irene Wieczorek, Aikaterini Antoniou, Christian Kaunert, Jörg Monar, Sarah Leonard and Michelle Pace. Karine Caunes and the two anonymous reviewers of deserve a special acknowledgement, as their comments and proposals really helped in improving the final form of the article. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the generous support by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond which has offered the financial opportunities through the RJ Sabbatical Grant, SAB21–0010 for pursuing part of the research constituting the basis for this article. European Law Journal
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author. European Law Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2021/11
Y1 - 2021/11
N2 - EU policy-making in criminal law is a matter of significant public concern for EU citizens and the Member States. The exercise of EU public powers in the fields of criminal law and law enforcement have tangible and adverse consequences for the liberties and well-being of individuals. Furthermore, EU cooperation in the area of criminal law touches upon core functions of statehood including ‘core state powers’ such as the safeguarding of internal security and law enforcement. This raises several questions regarding the rationale underpinning EU criminal policy and its legitimacy within the context of a multi-level polity. This article sketches out a normative argument for legitimate justifications for some particular areas of EU criminal law on the basis of the transnational criterion enshrined in the subsidiarity principle. The article claims that there is a compelling justification for EU action in criminal law to protect European public goods and other key transnational interests.
AB - EU policy-making in criminal law is a matter of significant public concern for EU citizens and the Member States. The exercise of EU public powers in the fields of criminal law and law enforcement have tangible and adverse consequences for the liberties and well-being of individuals. Furthermore, EU cooperation in the area of criminal law touches upon core functions of statehood including ‘core state powers’ such as the safeguarding of internal security and law enforcement. This raises several questions regarding the rationale underpinning EU criminal policy and its legitimacy within the context of a multi-level polity. This article sketches out a normative argument for legitimate justifications for some particular areas of EU criminal law on the basis of the transnational criterion enshrined in the subsidiarity principle. The article claims that there is a compelling justification for EU action in criminal law to protect European public goods and other key transnational interests.
U2 - 10.1111/eulj.12451
DO - 10.1111/eulj.12451
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85148025626
SN - 1351-5993
VL - 27
SP - 408
EP - 425
JO - European Law Journal
JF - European Law Journal
IS - 4-6
ER -