We use cookies on this site to provide you with an informative and engaging experience and also to help us to continually improve our site for you. Without allowing cookies certain features of the site will not be available. To learn more about how we use cookies, please view our cookie policy. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, you consent to our use of cookies on this device in accordance with our policy.

Logo of Wolters Kluwer, Kluwer Law Online
Common Market Law Review
Search content button

Home > All journals > Common Market Law Review > 55(2) >

Mutual trust and rights in EU criminal and asylum law: Three phases of evolution and the uncharted territory beyond blind trust

Cover image ofCommon Market Law Review

$25.00 - Rental (PDF) *

$49.00 - Article (PDF) *

*service fee may apply
Mutual trust and rights in EU criminal and asylum law: Three phases of evolution and the uncharted territory beyond blind trust


Common Market Law Review
Volume 55, Issue 2 (2018) pp. 489 – 509

https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2018034



Abstract

This article examines the evolving relationship of mutual trust and fundamental rights in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. The ECJ has long prioritized the effectiveness of instruments based on mutual trust through an unimpeded system of mutual recognition. Arguments based on a violation of fundamental rights were taken to contradict the presumption of compliance, refute mutual trust, and hinder automatic mutual recognition. The ECJ has now accepted, both in criminal and asylum law, that the presumption of compliance is not conclusive and mutual trust is not blind. The article observes an emergent, but carefully controlled dynamic of rights-based assessment through case-by-case analysis, illustrating three phases of mutual trust, but argues that this dynamic is slow, unclear and inadequate. It suggests that national authorities should take a proactive role, promoting real and constructive relationships of trust, allowing an individual assessment of rights violations via rights-based review. The latter is based on a proper understanding of trust, as an evolving concept based on evidence. Respect for rights, terminological clarity, enhanced judicial communication, and acknowledgment of shared values are the way forward.


Extract




Subscribe to this journal

Interested in a subscription? Contact our sales team

Browse by practice area
Share
Stay up to date


RSSETOC