The purpose of this article is twofold: to consider the relation between criminals who take advantage of their freedom of movement as European citizens and the State whose public policy or public security is violated by way of their crime; and to cast light on how this may impact the freedom of movement itself and, ultimately, the significance of European citizenship. To date, two sets of EU rules adversely affect the freedom of movement in the interest of protecting public policy and public security: those traditionally labelled as ‘restrictions to the freedom of movement and residence’, currently laid down in Directive 2004/38, and those in the European Arrest Warrant, established in Framework Decision 2002/584. The EU Institutions have apparently adopted a piecemeal approach in this field due to the different purposes of the two relevant sets of rules. This article reviews such piecemeal approach by comparing certain parallel aspects of Directive 2004/38 and Framework Decision 2002/584: this covers, first, the objective grounds for expulsion or for surrender respectively established therein, and second, the subjective limits applicable to criminals or alleged criminals settled in the host/executing State.
The Unbearable Lightness of a Piecemeal Approach. Moving Public Policy and Public Security Offenders in Europe
PISTOIA, Emanuela
2014-01-01
Abstract
The purpose of this article is twofold: to consider the relation between criminals who take advantage of their freedom of movement as European citizens and the State whose public policy or public security is violated by way of their crime; and to cast light on how this may impact the freedom of movement itself and, ultimately, the significance of European citizenship. To date, two sets of EU rules adversely affect the freedom of movement in the interest of protecting public policy and public security: those traditionally labelled as ‘restrictions to the freedom of movement and residence’, currently laid down in Directive 2004/38, and those in the European Arrest Warrant, established in Framework Decision 2002/584. The EU Institutions have apparently adopted a piecemeal approach in this field due to the different purposes of the two relevant sets of rules. This article reviews such piecemeal approach by comparing certain parallel aspects of Directive 2004/38 and Framework Decision 2002/584: this covers, first, the objective grounds for expulsion or for surrender respectively established therein, and second, the subjective limits applicable to criminals or alleged criminals settled in the host/executing State.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
