Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Problem of Obtaining Evidence from EU Countries While Achieving the “Crime Does Not Pay” Goal Cover

The Problem of Obtaining Evidence from EU Countries While Achieving the “Crime Does Not Pay” Goal

Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
Volume 17 (2024): Issue 2 (December 2024)
By:
Open Access
|Jan 2025

References

  1. Armada, Ines. “The European investigation order and the lack of European standards for gathering standards.” <em>New Journal of European Criminal Law</em> 6, 1 (2015): 8–31.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. Bachmaier Winter, Lorena. “Cross-Border Investigations Under the EPPO Proceedings and the Quest for Balance”: 117–139. In: Lorena Bachmaier Winter (ed.), <em>The European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The Challenges Ahead</em>. Springer, 2018.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. Bikelis, Skirmantas. “Pakartotinis įtartinos turto kilmės vertinimas – pateisinama viešojo intereso apsaugos priemonė ar žmogaus teisių pažeidimas?” (Re-evaluation of the suspicious origin of assets – a justified measure to protect the public interest or a violation of human rights?). <em>Kriminologijos studijos</em> 8 (2020): 38–56.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. ______. “Modeling the patterns of civil confiscation: balancing effectiveness, proportionality and the right to be presumed innocent.” <em>Baltic Journal of Law &amp; Politics</em> (2021): 27–28.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. Bose, Martin. <em>Study. An assessment of the Commission’s proposals on electronic evidence</em>. (September 2018) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604989/IPOL_STU(2018)604989_EN.pdf">https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604989/IPOL_STU(2018)604989_EN.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. Boucht, Johan. “Civil Asset Forfeiture and the Presumption of Innocence under Art. 6(2) ECHR”: 245. In: Jon Petter Rui and Ulrich Sieber (eds.), <em>Non-conviction-based confiscation in Europe. Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe.</em> Duncker &amp; Humblot, 2015.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 20 November 2008 – Proceeds of organised crime: ensuring that “crime does not pay”.” <em>COM</em> (2008): 766 final // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/crime-does-not-pay.html">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/crime-does-not-pay.html</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. “Commission of the European Communities Green paper on obtaining evidence in criminal matters from one Member State to another and securing its admissibility, Brussels, 11 November 2009.” <em>COM</em> (2009): 624 final // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A52009DC0624">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A52009DC0624</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. <em>Commission staff working document “impact assessment Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters and Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings //</em> <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=SWD%3A2018%3A118%3AFIN">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=SWD%3A2018%3A118%3AFIN</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. Council of Europe. <em>The Use of Non-Conviction Based Seizure and Confiscation.</em> (2020): 21 // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://rm.coe.int/the-use-of-non-conviction-based-seizure-and-confiscation-2020/1680a0b9d3">https://rm.coe.int/the-use-of-non-conviction-based-seizure-and-confiscation-2020/1680a0b9d3</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. <em>European e-justice portal</em>. Section “Country-specific information and electronic forms related to Regulation 2020/1783” // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://e-justice.europa.eu/38581/LT/taking_evidence_recast">https://e-justice.europa.eu/38581/LT/taking_evidence_recast</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. <em>Evaluation report on the tenth round of mutual evaluations. On the implementation of the European investigation order (EIO) Report of Lithuania</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16308-2023-REV-1/en/pdf">https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16308-2023-REV-1/en/pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. EUROPOL. <em>Europol, Does crime still pay? Criminal Asset Recovery in the EU – Survey of statistical information 2010–2014</em>. (2016) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/criminal_asset_recovery_in_the_eu_web_version.pdf">https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/criminal_asset_recovery_in_the_eu_web_version.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. Garcimartin Montero, Regina. “The European Investigation Order and the Respect for Fundamental Rights in Criminal Investigations.” <em>Eucrim</em> 1 (2017): 45–50.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. Magno, Teresa. “The Challenging Path Towards the Establishment of the EU Legal Framework Regulating Cross-Border Access to Digital Evidence”: 23–33. In: Maria Angela Biasiotti, Fabrizio Turchi (eds.), <em>European Investigation Order</em>. Springer, 2023.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. Martinaitytė, Laura. <em>Civil asset confiscation law – new criminal policy or restrictions out bounding criminal procedure?</em> Vilnius University, 2021, 76.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. Miettinen, Samuli. <em>Criminal law and policy in the European Union</em>. Routledge, 2013.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. Mitsilegas, Valsamis et al. <em>Research handbook on EU criminal law.</em> Cheltenham, 2016.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. Ryder, Nicholas. <em>Financial Crime in the 21st century.</em> Cheltenham, 2011.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. Klimek, Libor. “Free Movement of Evidence in Criminal Matters in the EU.” <em>The Lawyer Quarterly</em> 4 (2012): 250–290 // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://tlq.ilaw.cas.cz/index.php/tlq/article/download/49/40">https://tlq.ilaw.cas.cz/index.php/tlq/article/download/49/40</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. Kusak Martyna. “Common EU Minimum Standards for Enhancing Mutual Admissibility of Evidence Gathered in Criminal Matters.” <em>European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research</em> (2017): 337–352.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. ______. “Mutual admissibility of evidence and the European investigation order: aspirations lost in reality.” <em>ERA forum</em> (2019): 391–400.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. Naylo, Tom R. “Wash-out: A critique of follow-the-money methods in crime control policy.” <em>Crime, L &amp; Soc’l Change</em> 1 (1999).
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. <em>Report of the activities of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania in 2021</em> (2022, No. 17.9.-2228) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://prokuraturos.lt/data/public/uploads/2022/03/2021-m.-ataskaita-2022-03-01-nr.-17.9.-222803.21.pdf">https://prokuraturos.lt/data/public/uploads/2022/03/2021-m.-ataskaita-2022-03-01-nr.-17.9.-222803.21.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. <em>Report of the activities of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania in 2022</em> (2023, No. 17.9.-1974) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://prokuraturos.lt/data/public/uploads/2023/03/2022-m.-ataskaita-2023-03-01-nr.-17.9.-1974.pdf">https://prokuraturos.lt/data/public/uploads/2023/03/2022-m.-ataskaita-2023-03-01-nr.-17.9.-1974.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. <em>Report of the activities of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania in 2023</em> (2024, No. 17.9.-2177) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://prokuraturos.lt/data/public/uploads/2024/03/2023-m.-ataskaita-galutine.pdf">https://prokuraturos.lt/data/public/uploads/2024/03/2023-m.-ataskaita-galutine.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council “Asset recovery and confiscation: Ensuring that crime does not pay”.” <em>COM</em> (2020): 217 final // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5776f170-a4b5-11ea-bb7a-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&amp;format=PDF">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5776f170-a4b5-11ea-bb7a-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&amp;format=PDF</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Asset recovery and confiscation: Ensuring that crime does not pay.” <em>COM</em> (2020): 217 final // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eulex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5776f170-a4b5-11ea-bb7a01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&amp;format=PDF">https://eulex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5776f170-a4b5-11ea-bb7a01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&amp;format=PDF</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. Rojszczak, Marcin. “e–Evidence cooperation in criminal matters from an EU perspective.” Modern <em>Law Review</em> 85, 4 (2022): 997–1028.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. Ruggeri, Stefano. “Introduction to the Proposal of a European Investigation order: Due Process Concerns and Open Issues”: 3–25. In: Stefano Ruggeri (ed.), <em>Trans-national Evidence and Multicultural Inquiries in Europe</em>. Springer, 2014.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. Rusu, Ion. “European investigation order in criminal matters in the European Union. General considerations. Some critical opinions.” <em>Tribuna Juridică</em> 6.11 (2016): 56–70.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  32. Savona, Ernesto U., Riccardi, Michele. <em>Transcrime, From illegal markets to legitimate businesses: the portfolio of organised crime in Europe.</em> (August 2015) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://www.transcrime.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/OCP-Full-Report.pdf">http://www.transcrime.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/OCP-Full-Report.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  33. Sellier, Elonie, Weyembergh, Anne. <em>Criminal procedural laws across the European Union – A comparative analysis of selected main differences and the impact they have over the development of EU legislation</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604977/IPOL_STU(2018)604977_EN.pdf">https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604977/IPOL_STU(2018)604977_EN.pdf</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  34. Siracusano, Fabrizio. “The European Investigation Order for evidence gathering abroad”: 85–101. In: Tommaso Rafaraci and Rosanna Belfiore (eds.), <em>EU Criminal Justice. Fundamental rights, Transnational proceedings and the European public prosecutor’s office</em>. Springer, 2019.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  35. Šalčius, Marijus. <em>Neteisėtais baudžiamojo proceso veiksmais padarytos žalos atlyginimo problematika: mokslo daktaro disertacija</em> [Problems of compensation of damages inflicted by unlawful actions in the course of the criminal proceedings: doctoral dissertation]. Vytautas Magnus University, 2021.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  36. <em>The Stockholm programme – an open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/52166/celex_52010xg0504-01-_en_txt.pdf">https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/52166/celex_52010xg0504-01-_en_txt.pdf</ext-link> Tosza, Stanislaw. “All evidence is equal, but electronic evidence is more equal than any other: The relationship between the European investigation order and the European Production order.” <em>NJECL</em> Vol. 11(2) (2020): 161–183.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  37. Tomescu, Ina Raluca. “General Considerations regarding the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.” <em>Annals of the Constantin Brancusi University of Targu Jiu-Letters &amp; Social Sciences Series</em> (2023): 7–13.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  38. Turchi, Fabrizio. “Evidence Exchange Under the EIO: Technological Challenges”: 35-68. In: Maria Angela Biasiotti, Fabrizio Turchi (eds.), <em>European Investigation Order.</em> Springer, 2023.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  39. <em>Air Canada v United Kingdom</em>. European Court of Human Rights, 1995, application No. 18465/91.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  40. <em>Butler v UK</em>. European Court of Human Rights, 2002, application No. 41661/98.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  41. <em>Description of the procedure for conducting and organizing an asset investigation during civil asset confiscation</em>. Approved by the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Lithuania 2020 June 26 order No. I-173. Register of Legal Acts. 2020, No. 2020-14215.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  42. <em>Case C-324/17, 11 April 2019.</em>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  43. <em>Case C-584/19, 8 December 2020.</em>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  44. <em>Case C-852/19, 11 November 2021.</em>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  45. <em>Case C-724/19, 16 December 2021.</em>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  46. <em>Case C-16/22, 2 March 2023.</em>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  47. <em>Case C-255/23, 6 June 2024.</em>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  48. <em>Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania.</em> Official Gazette, 2002, No. 36-1340.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  49. <em>Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137">https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=137</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  50. <em>Council framework decision 2008/978/JHA on the European evidence warrant for the purpose of obtaining objects, documents and data for use in proceedings in criminal matter</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX-%3A32008F0978">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX-%3A32008F0978</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  51. <em>Council framework decision 2003/577/JHA on the execution in the European Union of orders freezing property or evidence</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32003F0577">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32003F0577</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  52. <em>Directive 2014/41/EU on the European Investigation Order in criminal matters</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014L0041">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014L0041</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  53. <em>Directive (EU) 2023/1544 laying down harmonised rules on the designation of designated establishments and the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering electronic evidence in criminal proceedings</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023L1544">https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023L1544</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  54. <em>Directive 2017/1371 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32017L1371">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32017L1371</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  55. Explanation of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania of 2024-05-14 No. (1.13 E) 7R-1626.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  56. <em>G. K. and others (Parquet européen).</em> Court of Justice Judgment of 21 December 2023, C-281/22.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  57. <em>Law on the Civil Asset Confiscation of the Republic of Lithuania.</em> Register of Legal Acts. 2020, No. 2020-06992.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  58. <em>Law on Implementation of the European Union and International Law on Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania.</em> Official Gazette, 2008, No. 137-5366.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  59. <em>Law on the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania</em>. Official Gazette, 1994, No. 81-1514.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  60. <em>M v Italy</em>. European Court of Human Rights, 1991, application No. 12386/86.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  61. <em>Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters</em> (recast) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32012R1215">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32012R1215</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  62. <em>Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (taking of evidence)</em> (recast) // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/LT/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32020R1783">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/LT/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32020R1783</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  63. <em>Regulation (EU) 2023/1543 on European Production Orders and European Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal proceedings and for the execution of custodial sentences following criminal proceedings</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1543">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1543</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  64. <em>Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) //</em> <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  65. <em>The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union</em> // <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A12012E%2FTXT">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A12012E%2FTXT</ext-link>
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  66. <em>The Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.</em> Official Gazette, 1992, No. 33-1014.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2024-00022 | Journal eISSN: 2029-0454
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 207 - 227
Submitted on: Aug 13, 2024
Accepted on: Dec 12, 2024
Published on: Jan 22, 2025
Published by: Vytautas Magnus University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 times per year
Keywords:
Criminal procedure law,
E-evidence,
European investigation order,
European Public Prosecutor’s Office,
Civil asset confiscation
Related subjects:
Law,
Law, other,
Social sciences,
Political science,
Political science, other

© 2025 Marijus Šalčius, Reda Molienė, published by Vytautas Magnus University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 17 (2024): Issue 2 (December 2024)Next article