In October 2013, the European Union adopted a Directive, which guarantees, inter alia, the right of access to a lawyer to suspects of criminal offences from the outset of police custody and during police interrogation. However, adoption of the relevant legislation is not sufficient to ensure that this right becomes effective in practice. A range of practical measures will have to be taken by the Member States’ authorities and the legal profession to effectuate the implementation of the right to custodial legal advice. This article aims to identify the practical factors that may influence the implementation of the Directive, based on the findings of a recent normative and empirical study conducted by the authors. The research was carried out in four European jurisdictions (England and Wales, France, the Netherlands and Scotland), and it consisted of analysis of regulations, observations of daily practice in police stations, accompanying lawyers who provided custodial legal advice, and interviews with criminal justice practitioners. The article provides a range of recommendations on the practical measures to be undertaken by the EU Member States and national Bar associations aiming at improving the protection of suspects’ rights in police custody in practice. |
Search result: 6 articles
Year 2014 xArticle |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 4 2014 |
Keywords | legal advice, police interrogation, European Union, England and Wales, France |
Authors | Anna Ogorodova and Taru Spronken |
AbstractAuthor's information |
Article |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 4 2014 |
Keywords | legal representation, counsel, juvenile justice, police interrogations, children’s rights |
Authors | Prof. Dr. Ton Liefaard Ph.D. LL.M and Yannick van den Brink |
AbstractAuthor's information |
The right to counsel of juveniles at the stage of police interrogations has gained significant attention since the Salduz ruling of the European Court on Human Rights in 2008. The legislative and policy developments that have taken place since then and that are still ongoing – both on a regional (European) and domestic (Dutch) level – reveal a shared belief that juvenile suspects must be awarded special protection in this phase of the criminal justice proceedings. This calls for a youth-specific approach as fundamentally different from the common approach for adults. At the same time, there seems to be ambivalence concerning the justification and concrete implications of such a youth-specific approach. This article aims to clarify the underlying rationale and significance of a youth specific approach to the right to counsel at the stage of police interrogations on the basis of an interdisciplinary analysis of European Court on Human Rights case law, international children’s rights standards and relevant developmental psychological insights. In addition, this article aims to position this right of juveniles in conflict with the law in the particular context of the Dutch juvenile justice system and provide concrete recommendations to the Dutch legislator. |
Article |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 4 2014 |
Keywords | confession, interrogation, evidence |
Authors | Eric Rassin Ph.D. and Han Israëls |
AbstractAuthor's information |
Intuitively, confession is a strong piece of evidence, because it appears unlikely that a suspect would confess to a crime he did not commit, thereby acting against his own best interest. Surprisingly, experimental studies show that innocent and well-educated individuals do tend to confess falsely when questioned about something they did not in fact do. In this contribution, an overview is presented of the experimental research on confession evidence. Limitations and implications of the scientific insights are discussed. |
Article |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 4 2014 |
Authors | Willem-Jan Verhoeven Ph.D. |
Author's information |
Article |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 1 2014 |
Keywords | tax competition, tax planning, European Union, Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base, factor manipulation |
Authors | Maarten de Wilde LL.M |
AbstractAuthor's information |
The author addresses the phenomenon of taxable profit-shifting operations undertaken by multinationals in response to countries competing for corporate tax bases within the European Union. The central question is whether this might be a relic of the past when the European Commission’s proposal for a Council Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base sees the light of day. Or would the EU-wide corporate tax system provide incentives for multinationals to pursue artificial tax base-shifting practices within the EU, potentially invigorating the risk of undue governmental tax competition responses? The author’s tentative answer on the potential for artificial base shifting and undue tax competition is in the affirmative. Today, the issue of harmful tax competition within the EU seems to have been pushed back as a result of the soft law approaches that were initiated in the late 1990s and early 2000s. But things might change if the CCCTB proposal as currently drafted enters into force. There may be a risk that substantial parts of the EU tax base would instantly become mobile as of that day. As the EU Member States at that time seem to have only a single tool available to respond to this – the tax rate – that may perhaps initiate an undesirable race for the EU tax base, at least theoretically. |
Article |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 1 2014 |
Keywords | tax planning, optimal taxation, tax competition, corporate taxation |
Authors | Hendrik Vrijburg Ph.D. |
AbstractAuthor's information |
This article presents a literature review on the welfare effects of excessive company taxation practices. The article intends to structure the debate by sketching a conceptual framework of thought for the topic under consideration and places the existing literature within this framework. The article ends with a thought-provoking discussion between two extreme papers in the literature, one against tax planning and one in favour. The discussion is concluded by identifying the fundamental differences in assumptions underlying both approaches. |