English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Gert Vermeulen The landscape of cross-border evidence gathering in criminal matters in the EU has become blurred. Non-traditional actors, such as administrative authorities and intelligence services, have joined traditional judicial and law enforcement authorities in a domain which used to be looked upon as predominantly judicial cooperation territory. Criminal justice and administrative finalities run the risk of being constantly mixed up. This creates problems in light of the separation of powers, adequate legal and procedural protection in criminal matters and data protection. Gert Vermeulen believes that restoring the balance requires stepping away from traditional authority-based thinking and policy-making. He suggests to embrace ‘criminal justice finality’ as the key normative marker for EU cross-border intelligence, information and evidence gathering and exchange in criminal matters. The traditional distinction between judicial and police cooperation in criminal matters can no longer be upheld, he concludes. He argues that the distinction is largely artificial, creates confusion and produces inconsistencies, thus hindering the establishment and further development of a coherent EU criminal law policy.

Free gathering and movement of evidence in criminal matters in the EU : Thinking beyond borders, striving for balance, in search of coherence