The evolving notion of mutual recognition in the CJEU’s case law on detention

Pedro Caeiro ^[1] ; Sónia Fidalgo ^[1] ; João Prata Rodrigues
1. [1] Universidade de Coimbra
  
  Universidade de Coimbra
  
  Coimbra (Sé Nova), Portugal
Localización: Maastricht journal of European and comparative law, ISSN 1023-263X, Vol. 25, Nº. 6 (Special issue: Punishment, deprivation of liberty and the Europeanization of criminal justice), 2018, págs. 689-703
Idioma: inglés
Enlaces
- Texto completo

Resumen
- This article analyses the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on detention and the possible evolution of the understanding of mutual recognition stemming therefrom. In the Lanigan, JZ, and Ognyanov decisions, the CJEU assimilated mutual recognition with the effectiveness of cooperation, which should be understood as maximum compliance with the issuing state’s interests. Arguably, this approach is detrimental to other important values, such as, for example, the rights arising from excessively long detention and a rational and meaningful approach to the enforcement of imprisonment. On the other hand, the Aranyosi and Căldăraru judgment has detached mutual recognition from the exclusive protection of the issuing state and has turned it into a neutral governance principle. If mutual trust is not a given and can be assessed on a case-by-case basis through common objective parameters, the decisions deserving recognition may be uttered either by the issuing or the executing authority.