"Protection of fundamental rights in particular must be central to the operation of the system": the formula, worked to the top of the most recent evaluation paper on the experience of the MFA (2011), summarizes the progressive logical shift from the perspective of efficiency and security to the view of the primacy of the protection of individual rights, in the whole face of the pre-trial precautionary measures in criminal proceedings in EU area. The experiences of the principle of proportionality become, in this way, basic paradigms for reading the system in terms of applied law: the three levels through which the filter of proportionality has worked in the system of the EAW (clot multilevel regulatory choices; spaces of individual assessment by the judicial authority; retrospective assessments of practice, which trigger reinvestment in terms of "return into circulation") offer major tools for a wider reading, which extends to the phenomenon of the circulation of the pre-trial non-precautionary measures, according to the relevant framework decision on 2009. In the area of precautionary measures, harmonization of the laws of the Member States seems to persist today, nuanced, as a simple background: a method line that seems almost - and it is a paradoxe - recessive and it is, however, recovered to the centrality of the debate.

"Protection of fundamental rights in particular must be central to the operation of the system": la formula, adoperata al culmine del più recente documento valutativo sull’esperienza del MAE (2011), ben sintetizza, sul piano dell'indirizzo politico, il progressivo spostamento degli accenti logici, dalla prospettiva dell'efficienza e della sicurezza a quella della primazia della tutela dei diritti individuali, dell'intero quadrante delle misure limitative della libertà individuale in ambito UE. I vissuti del principio di proporzionalità divengono, per questa via, paradigmi di fondo per la lettura del sistema in termini di applied law: i tre livelli attraverso i quali il filtro di proporzionalità ha operato nel sistema del MAE (coagulo plurilivello delle scelte normative; spazi di discrezionalità valutativa di pertinenza dell'autorità giudiziaria; valutazioni retrospettive ufficiali della prassi, che innescano reinvestimenti in termini di "ritorni in circolo") offrono strumenti di grande rilievo per una più ampia lettura, che si estende al fenomeno della circolazione dei titoli cautelari non custodiali, cui si riferisce la pertinente decisione quadro del 2009. Nel quadrante cautelare l'ottica dell'armonizzazione delle legislazioni nazionali degli Stati membri sembra oggi permanere, sfumata, quale semplice direttrice di sfondo: una dorsale di metodo che parrebbe quasi - ed è paradossale - aver perso smalto e che va, invece, recuperata alla centralità del dibattito.

DI CHIARA, G. (2013). The Protection of the Right of Freedom on the European Union Level: The European Arrest Warrant and Non-custodial Pre Trial Measures. The Guideline of Principle of Proportionality: An Interpretative Perspective. In S. Ruggeri (a cura di), Transnational Inquiries and the Protection of Fundamental Rights in Criminal Proceedings (pp. 241-252). Berlin Heidelberg : Springer.

The Protection of the Right of Freedom on the European Union Level: The European Arrest Warrant and Non-custodial Pre Trial Measures. The Guideline of Principle of Proportionality: An Interpretative Perspective

DI CHIARA, Giuseppe
2013-01-01

Abstract

"Protection of fundamental rights in particular must be central to the operation of the system": the formula, worked to the top of the most recent evaluation paper on the experience of the MFA (2011), summarizes the progressive logical shift from the perspective of efficiency and security to the view of the primacy of the protection of individual rights, in the whole face of the pre-trial precautionary measures in criminal proceedings in EU area. The experiences of the principle of proportionality become, in this way, basic paradigms for reading the system in terms of applied law: the three levels through which the filter of proportionality has worked in the system of the EAW (clot multilevel regulatory choices; spaces of individual assessment by the judicial authority; retrospective assessments of practice, which trigger reinvestment in terms of "return into circulation") offer major tools for a wider reading, which extends to the phenomenon of the circulation of the pre-trial non-precautionary measures, according to the relevant framework decision on 2009. In the area of precautionary measures, harmonization of the laws of the Member States seems to persist today, nuanced, as a simple background: a method line that seems almost - and it is a paradoxe - recessive and it is, however, recovered to the centrality of the debate.
2013
Settore IUS/16 - Diritto Processuale Penale
DI CHIARA, G. (2013). The Protection of the Right of Freedom on the European Union Level: The European Arrest Warrant and Non-custodial Pre Trial Measures. The Guideline of Principle of Proportionality: An Interpretative Perspective. In S. Ruggeri (a cura di), Transnational Inquiries and the Protection of Fundamental Rights in Criminal Proceedings (pp. 241-252). Berlin Heidelberg : Springer.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Di Chiara Springer Ruggeri MAE 2013.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo principale
Dimensione 1.02 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.02 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10447/71031
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact