Eurojust and the European Public Prosecutor Perspective: From Cooperation to Integration in EU Criminal Justice?

Abstract

Abstract Since its formal establishment as a treaty objective in 1999 the EU's area of criminal justice has been primarily based on mechanisms and instruments facilitating cooperation between national judicial authorities. Because of the political sensitivity of the criminal justice domain member states have largely avoided extensive harmonisation and hierarchical structures. While some real progress has been achieved the absence of a more integrated cross-border criminal justice system continues to reduce the effectiveness of cross-border cooperation. Since its establishment in 2002 Eurojust has been at the frontline of the emerging criminal justice area, and the gradual strengthening of Eurojust has been among the primary EU responses to the continuing dysfunctionalities of its criminal justice area. This process has already introduced elements of subordination of national authorities to Eurojust because of its evolving initiative, guidance, monitoring and external relations functions. The strengthening of the functions of Eurojust through the 2008 Eurojust decision straddles the borderlines between a purely cooperation based system and one with distinctive elements of integration. The Articles 85 TFEU on Eurojust and 86 TFEU on the EPPO introduced by the Lisbon Treaty have created the potential of a decisive shift towards integration in the criminal justice area. This shift would already be important in case of the strengthening of Eurojust's initiative, coordination and conflict resolution powers in line with Article 85, even though the treaty provisions leave the choice between ‘harder’ and ‘softer’ implementation options. Yet the transformation could be dramatic in case of the establishment – ‘from Eurojust’ – of the EPPO whose powers would have a direct reach into the national criminal justice systems and create the need for a significant harmonisation of both procedural and substantive criminal law and major implications even for the national police systems.