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

But what defines these Euro-crimes vis-à-vis other type of criminality It is suggested
that there are two dominant features: first, the nature of the goods protected. The
criminalisation of these behaviours tends to protect public goods or goods related to
collective institutions or collective interests, such as the stability of the political and
financial systems, the security of the State (in this case of the European Communities
and the European Union) or the efficacy of its policies. The criminalisation of money
laundering, for example, attempts to protect the stability of financial systems; the
criminalisation of terrorism protects democratic values as well as the structures and
ultimate survival of the State; criminalisation of corruption aims at the protection of a
political system and of the principles and institutions that are embedded in it. This stands
in contrast with the protection of private property or the integrity of the person, which
are protected by crimes such as assault, theft, rape or even murder for example. 68
A second defining feature is that Euro-crimes also have a distinctive structure. They
appear as complex offences in a twofold manner: they often involve the use of some sort
of infrastructure in a broad sense such as the use of means of transport (a case in point
being human trafficking which usually involves transport to move people), technology
or the use of support materials (the commission of terrorism-related offences, for
example, usually involves the use of materials or means such as the construction or
assembly of chemical or other type of weaponry or the use of sites to assemble and
prepare a terrorist attack). Likewise, many of these offences are complex in the sense
that they involve a degree of collective action: usually more than one perpetrator is
required and a certain degree of coordination between the different participants must
take place. Trafficking in human beings, terrorism or even corruption are rarely actions
that can be performed by a single individual alone. 69
It is in this setting that the TEU(A) entered into force. Chapter 3 will look at the new
stage of development of ECL that came about through this Treaty. It will remark that the
TEU(A) significantly reshaped the institutional and substantive frame of ECL. First, at
an institutional level, it brought about significant empowerment and formalisation of the
role of the EU in criminal matters as well as broadened the range of tools and the scope
of intervention. 70 The fight against organised crime is solidified, 71 the protection of EC
interests and policies expanded 72 and a new rationale emerges—the protection of
fundamental rights and mostly of the rights of the victim. 73 A clear dynamic, which
68 Chapter 2, section 4.
69 Chapter 2, section 4.
70 Chapter 3, section 1 and 1.2.
71 Chapter 3, section 2.11.
72 Chapter 3, section 2.1.2.
73 Chapter 3, section 2.1.3.
29