Commission v. Council (criminal sanctions for environmental measures)
FACTS Framework Directive requiring states to adopt criminal penalties for a number of serious environmental offenses (Commission/Parliment claim that should have been adopted under TFEU 192, not TEU’s pillar 3)
HOLDING
-Court holds that should have been adopted under 192 - have as their main purpose the protection of the environment.
ANALYSIS
-Protection of the environment constitutes one of the essential objectives of the community.
-Community has as its task to promote a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment and to that end, EC Treaty provides for the establishment of a policy in the sphere of the environment.
-As a general rule, neither criminal law nor the rules of criminal procedure fall within the Community’s competence. However, in this case the states may choose the appropriate criminal penalties to apply re: environmental protection and they must be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive.
-EU may be competent to require criminal penalties as a means of ensuring the effective application and enforcement of EU law.
-There is a recognition that, despite conferral, the EU has powers that they can use, even though it may go too far.
Preemption of Member State Law
Can the laws coexist?
When there is a proceeding already taking place, can national authorities apply the same facts laid down by the national (state) law?
→ Yes, but can only be allowed in so far as it does not prejudice the uniform application throughout the rule and full effect of the measures adopted in implementation of those rules.
FACTS Framework Directive requiring states to adopt criminal penalties for a number of serious environmental offenses (Commission/Parliment claim that should have been adopted under TFEU 192, not TEU’s pillar 3)
HOLDING
-Court holds that should have been adopted under 192 - have as their main purpose the protection of the environment.
ANALYSIS
-Protection of the environment constitutes one of the essential objectives of the community.
-Community has as its task to promote a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment and to that end, EC Treaty provides for the establishment of a policy in the sphere of the environment.
-As a general rule, neither criminal law nor the rules of criminal procedure fall within the Community’s competence. However, in this case the states may choose the appropriate criminal penalties to apply re: environmental protection and they must be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive.
-EU may be competent to require criminal penalties as a means of ensuring the effective application and enforcement of EU law.
-There is a recognition that, despite conferral, the EU has powers that they can use, even though it may go too far.
Preemption of Member State Law
Can the laws coexist?
When there is a proceeding already taking place, can national authorities apply the same facts laid down by the national (state) law?
→ Yes, but can only be allowed in so far as it does not prejudice the uniform application throughout the rule and full effect of the measures adopted in implementation of those rules.
No comments:
Post a Comment