The evolution of European Union criminal law (1957-2012)
The evolution of European Union criminal law (1957-2012)
The evolution of European Union criminal law (1957-2012)
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
prisoners with the view <strong>of</strong> ‘facilitating the social rehabilitation <strong>of</strong> the sentenced<br />
person.’ 846<br />
<strong>The</strong> sentencing State can forward the judgment to the State <strong>of</strong> nationality where the<br />
sentenced person lives, to the State <strong>of</strong> nationality to where the sentenced person is to be<br />
deported once released from the sentence (regardless <strong>of</strong> being the State where the person<br />
usually lives) and, finally, to any other Member State as long as the latter and the<br />
sentenced person so consent. 847 <strong>The</strong> right <strong>of</strong> initiative remains clearly on the sentencing<br />
State. This can also be derived from the fact that although Article 4 (5) allows the<br />
executing State and the sentenced person to place requests themselves for the forwarding<br />
<strong>of</strong> the sentence, those requests do not create any obligation on the sentencing State.<br />
Equally, an opinion on the suitability <strong>of</strong> the request by the executing State does need to<br />
be taken in consideration by the forwarding State. 848 Furthermore, the issuing State may<br />
withdraw the certificate from the executing State as long as the enforcement <strong>of</strong> the<br />
sentence has not begun in which case the executing State shall no longer execute the<br />
sentence. 849<br />
<strong>The</strong> executing State shall recognise the judgment and “shall forthwith take all necessary<br />
measures for the enforcement <strong>of</strong> the sentence” 850<br />
It also shall decide<br />
“… as quickly as possible whether to recognise the judgment and enforce the<br />
sentence…” and “Unless a ground for postponement exists… the final decision… shall<br />
be taken within a period <strong>of</strong> 90 days <strong>of</strong> receipt <strong>of</strong> the judgment and the certificate.” 851<br />
However, this exclusive right <strong>of</strong> initiative on the sentencing State is not a synonym for a<br />
completely passive position <strong>of</strong> the executing State. In fact, the latter recovers once again<br />
some <strong>of</strong> the guarantees that had initially been foregone in other mutual recognition<br />
measures involving deprivation <strong>of</strong> liberty for the purpose <strong>of</strong> their enforcement in the <strong>European</strong><br />
<strong>Union</strong>, OJ L 327/27 [2008].<br />
846 Article 1, ibid..<br />
847 Article 4 (1) (a) (b) (c), ibid..<br />
848 Article 4(4), ibid..<br />
849 Article 13, ibid..<br />
850 Article 8 (1), ibid..<br />
851 Article 12 (1) and (2), ibid..<br />
225
Change language