SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Hukuk ve Politika / 2009 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 20

Avrupa tutuklama müzekkeresinde özgürlük ve güvenlik arasındaki denge

Mehmet ÖZCAN
Bahadır YAKUT
Pages
1–31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

With the establishment of the EAW, these two issues have constituted the most controversial aspects of the EAW for implementation of principle of mutual recognition.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Within the framework öf the mutual recognition (the free movement1 of prosecutions and judgments), the European Arrest Warrant ('EAW') is the most striking instrument of judicial criminal cooperation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The EAW is based on the assumption that certain level of harmonization exist across the EU, which depends on underpinnings of (mutual trust) sufficient level of protection for rights of individuals and abolition of further border checks (abolition of dual criminality).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:With the establishment of the EAW, these two issues have constituted the most controversial aspects of the EAW for implementation of principle of mutual recognition.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Within the framework öf the mutual recognition (the free movement1 of prosecutions and judgments), the European Arrest Warrant ('EAW') is the most striking instrument of judicial criminal cooperation. The EAW is based on the assumption that certain level of harmonization exist across the EU, which depends on underpinnings of (mutual trust) sufficient level of protection for rights of individuals and abolition of further border checks (abolition of dual criminality). With the establishment of the EAW, these two issues have constituted the most controversial aspects of the EAW for implementation of principle of mutual recognition.

Özet

Mahkeme kararlarının karşılıklı tanınması çerçevesinde Avrupa Tutuklama Müzekkeresi en önemli cezai adli işbirliği enstrümanlarından diridir. Avrupa Tutuklama Müzekkeresi AB çapında belirli seviyede mevzuat uyumunun bulunduğu varsayımına dayanmaktadır. Bu varsayım da üye ülke hukuk sistemlerinde belirli seviyede bireylerin temel hak ve özgürlüklerinin güvence alınmasına ve çifte suçluluk gerekliliğinin kaldırılmış olmasına ve böylelikle karşılıklı güven unsurunun sağlanmış olduğu düşüncesi üzerine bina edilmektedir. Avrupa Tutuklama Müzekkeresinin oluşturulması ile bu hususlar karşılıklı tanıma ilkesinin uygulanması bakımından en tartışmalı yönleri teşkil etmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZCAN, M., YAKUT, B. (2009). Avrupa tutuklama müzekkeresinde özgürlük ve güvenlik arasındaki denge. Uluslararası Hukuk ve Politika, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 20, 1–31. https://ajindex.com/articles/322294

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Alegre, S., and Leaf, M., 'Criminal Law and Fundamental Rights in the EU: Moving Towards Closer Co-operation', 8 European Human Rights Law Review, 2003.
  2. Allegre, S., and Leaf, M., 'Mutual Recognition and Judicial Cooperation: A Step Too Far Too Soon? Case Study-European Arrest Warrant,' European Law lournal 10(2), 2004
  3. Ang, L., 'Procedural Rules', in in Blekxtoon, R., and Van Balleji, W., Handbook on the European Arrest "Warrant, (the Hague: Asser Press, 2004)
  4. Apap, J., and Carrera, S., 'European Arrest Warrant: Good Testing for Mutual Recognition in the Enlarged Europe', CEPS Policy Brief No. 46, (2004), s.6, s. http://www.ceps.be/ (Erişim Tarihi: 24.8.2006)
  5. Asp, P., 'Mutual Recognition and the Development of Criminal Law Cooperation within the EU,' içinde Strandbakken, A., Harmonization of Criminal Law in European Union, (Antwerpen-Oxford: Intersentia Publishing, 2005)
  6. Brady, H., and Roma, M., 'Let Justice be done: Punishing crime in the EU', policy brief London: Center for European Reform, at.2; at http:www.cer.org.uk, (Erişim Tarihi: 20 Mart 2008).
  7. Bem, K., 'The European Arrest Warrant and the Polish Constitutional Court Decision of 27 April 2005', in in Guild, E., Constitutional Challenges to the European Arrest Warrant, (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publisher, 2006)
  8. Cherif Bassiouni, M., International Extradition: United States Law and Practice, 4th edition (New York: Oxford University Pres, 2002)
  9. De Groot, S., 'Mutual Trust in European Extradition Law', in Blekxtoon, R., and Van Balleji, W., Handbook on the European Arrest "Warrant', (the Hague: Asser Press, 2004) Eurojust Yıllık Raporu ve Avrupa Parlamentosunun Konseye Tavsiyesi 15 Mar 2006 (P6 TA-PROV (2006) 0083) Feller, S.Z., 'The Scope of Reciprocity in Extradition', 10 Israel Law Review, 1975
  10. Fletcher, M., Lööf, R., and Gilmore, Bill., EU Criminal Law and lustice, (USA:Edward Elgar, 2008)
  11. Gbandi, K., 'EU Committee, House of Lords, In a Memorandum to the UK House of Lord inquiry, 'Procedural Rights in Criminal Proceedings' (Stationary Office; HL Paper; 28), 2 July 2005
  12. Garlick, P., 'The European Arrest Warrant and the ECHR,' in Blekxtoon, R., and Van Balleji, W., Handbook on the European Arrest "Warrant, (the Hague: Asser Press, 2004)
  13. Gartner, I., 'Concurrent National and International Criminal Jurisdiction and the 'Principle ne bis in idem', Austrian National Report Revue Internationale de Droit Penale, 2004, s.13, www.cairn.info/load_pdf.php? (Erişim Tarihi: 17-Ocak 2008).
  14. Geyer, F., 'The European Ar