THE APPLICATION OF THE NE BIS IN IDEM RELATED TO FINANCIAL OFFENCES IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE EUROPEAN COURTS
Abstract
In the article, the authors analyze the fundamental challenges in the application of the ne bis in idem principle in the practice of the European Court for Human Rights and Court of Justice of the EU and their interpretation of the principle in relation to the application on the criminal offences and misdemeanour offences, including administrative penal offences, against the same person for the same acts. Article followed the development in interpretation of the principle by the European Court of Human Rights in Zolotukhin case to the interpretation of the Court of Justice of the EU in Menci case. European Courts jurisprudence could be used for dialogue on challenges that the Serbian judiciary and tax authories are facing in the interpretation of legislation and application of ne bis in idem principle on criminal and misdemeanour procedings against the same person for the same acts. The articile provides the basis for discussion on the unification of court practice.
References
A. and B. v. Norway (November 11, 2016). Applications nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11. Retrieved March 15, 2020 from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-168972
Bovan, S. (2014). Metodski potencijal hermeneutičkog pragmatizma u razumevanju i primeni načela ne bis in idem. Crimen, 5(1), 62–74.
Burić, Z. (2019). Ne bis in idem in European criminal law: Moving in circles? In D. Duić et al. (Eds.), International scientific conference „EU and comparative law issues and challenges” (Series 3 (ECLIC), pp. 507–520). Osijek: University of Osijek, Faculty of Law Josip Juraj Strossmayer. http://doi.org/10.25234/eclic.
Desterbeck, F. (2019). Ne bis in idem and tax offences: How Belgium adapted its legislation to the recent case law of the ECtHR and the CJEU. Eucrim, (2), 135–141.
Ilić, G. (2017). Načelo ne bis in idem u praksi Evropskog suda za ljudska prava. Strani pravni život, 61(3), 21–34.
Kostić, J. (2018). Krivičnopravna zaštita finansijskih interesa Evropske unije. Beograd: Institut za uporedno pravo.
Luchtman, M. (2018). The ECJ'S recent case law on the ne bis in idem: Implications for law enforcement in a shared legal order. Common Market Law Review, 55(6), 1717–1750.
Matić Bošković, M. (2016). Uloga Evropskog javnog tužioca u borbi protiv organizovanog kriminala. In J. Ćirić (Ed.), Scientific conference Suzbijanje organizovanog kriminala kao preduslov vladavine prava (pp. 247–258). Beograd: Institut za uporedno pravo.
Mirandola, S., Lasagni, G. (2019). The European ne bis in idem at the Crossroads Administrative and Criminal Law. Eucrim, (2), 126–135. https://doi.org/10.30709/eucrim-2019-009 //.
Mitsilegas, V. (2009). EU criminal law. Oxford–Portland: Hart Publishing.
Mrvić Petrović, N. (2014). Poštovanje načela ne bis in idem pri suđenju za slične prekršaje i krivična dela. NBP – Žurnal za kriminalistiku i pravo, 19(2), 27–39.
Nenadic, S. (2014). Načelo ne bis in idem u Evropskoj konvenciji za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda i primena načela u praksi Evropskog suda za ljudska prava. Revija za kriminologiju i krivicno pravo, 52(2), 144–167.
Peers, S. (2013). EU Justice and Home Affairs Law (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Satzger, H. (2012). International and European criminal law. München: Beck, C. H.; Oxford: Hart; Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Sergey Zolotuhkin v. Russia. Application no. 14939/03. Retrieved October 28, 2019 from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-91222%22]}
Stojanović, S. (2007). Razvoj sistema finansiranja Evropske unije. In J. Ćirić (Ed.), 50 godina Evropske unije (pp. 159–185). Beograd: Institut za uporedno pravo; Vlada Republike Srbije, Kancelarija za evropske integracije.
Škulić, M. (2014). Krivično procesno pravo. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta; Dosije studio.
The decision Už-1285/2012, dated March 26, 2014.
The judgment of the Appellate Court in Belgrade Kž1 Po1 32/2015, dated June 23, 2016.
The judgment of the Appellate Court in Niš, Kž1 1195/2016, dated November 18, 2016.
The Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (March 20, 2018). The request for a preliminary ruling under article 267 TFEU from the Tribunale di Bergamo C-524/2015.
The Judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case Åklagaren v Hans Åkerberg Fransson C 617/10.
The ruling of the High Court in Novi Sad Kž 2 94/2014, dated April 15, 2014.
Trechsel, S. (2005). Human rights in criminal proceedings. New York: Oxford University Press.
Van Bockel, B. (2010). The ne bis in idem principle in EU law. Kluwer: Kluwer Law International.
Vervaele, J. A. E. (2005). The transnational ne bis in idem principle in the EU. Mutual recognition and equivalent protection of human rights. Utrecht Law Review, 1(2), 100–108.
Vervaele, J. A. E. (2013). Ne bis in idem: Towards a transnational constitutional principle in the EU. Utrecht Law Review, 9(4), 211–229.
Vetzo, M. (2018). The past, present and future of the ne bis in idem dialogue between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights: The cases of Menci, Garlsson and Di Puma. Review of European Administrative Law, 11(2), 55–84.