The evolution of European Union criminal law (1957-2012)

- closer cooperation between judicial and other competent authorities of the
Member States in accordance with the provisions of Articles 31 (a) to (d) and
32;
- approximation, where necessary, of rules on criminal matters in the Member
States, in accordance with the provisions of Article 31 (e).”
This movement towards an increased role of the EU in criminal matters was enhanced
by the empowerment of the EU actors vis-à-vis the Member States, as the European
Commission, the European Parliament (EP) and the CJEU acquired a more significant
role with the TEU(A). The CJEU, for example, was given jurisdiction—subject to
Member States’ acceptance—to deliver preliminary rulings on the validity and
interpretation of framework decisions and decisions, on the interpretation of conventions
and of measures implementing them. Member States could choose to limit jurisdiction to
courts of last appeal or alternatively to allow any national court to refer a question. 386
The EP was given compulsory consultation powers. Article 38 TEU(A) required the
Council to consult with the EP before adopting decisions, framework decisions or
conventions. The EP could also ask questions or make recommendations to the Council
as well as hold a yearly debate on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. 387
In turn, the Commission was once again to be “fully associated with the work in the
areas referred to in this Title”, 388 whilst also having power to initiate legislation (shared
with the Council and any Member State). 389 Indeed, Member States and the Council
remained nonetheless at the centre of the decision-making process. Article 34 (2)
TEU(A) clearly stated
“The Council shall take measures and promote cooperation, using appropriate form and
procedures as set out in this Title, contributing to the pursuit of the objectives of the
Union. To that end, acting unanimously on the initiative of any Member States or of the
Commission the Council may”
adopt common positions, framework decisions, decisions or conventions.
Furthermore, the role of EU in criminal matters was enhanced by the introduction of
new and more efficient legal instruments for intervention in criminal matters, namely
common positions, decisions and framework decisions, whilst maintaining conventions
as an instrument to legislate in this domain. Article 34 TEU(A) provided that common
386 Article 35 TEU(A).
387 Article 39 (3) TEU(A).
388 Article 36 (2) TEU(A).
389 Article 34 (2) TEU(A).
108