Decision 2009/426 - Strengthening of Eurojust and amending Decision 2002/187/JHA setting up Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
Contents
official title
Council Decision 2009/426/JHA of 16 December 2008 on the strengthening of Eurojust and amending Decision 2002/187/JHA setting up Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime| Legal instrument | Decision |
|---|---|
| Number legal act | Decision 2009/426 |
| Original proposal | JAI(2008)3 |
| CELEX number i | 32009D0426 |
| Document | 16-12-2008 |
|---|---|
| Publication in Official Journal | 04-06-2009; OJ L 138, 4.6.2009,Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 19 Volume 006 |
| Effect | 04-06-2009; Takes effect Date pub. See Art 3 |
| End of validity | 11-12-2019; Implicitly repealed by 32018R1727 |
| Transposition | 04-06-2011; At the latest See Art 2 |
4.6.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 138/14 |
COUNCIL DECISION 2009/426/JHA
of 16 December 2008
on the strengthening of Eurojust and amending Decision 2002/187/JHA setting up Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 31(2) and 34(2)(c) thereof,
Having regard to the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden,
Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas:
(1) |
Eurojust was set up by Council Decision 2002/187/JHA (2) as a body of the European Union with legal personality to stimulate and to improve coordination and cooperation between competent judicial authorities of the Member States. |
(2) |
On the basis of an assessment of the experience gained by Eurojust, a further enhancement of its operational effectiveness is needed by taking account of that experience. |
(3) |
The time has come to ensure that Eurojust becomes more operational and that the status of national members is approximated. |
(4) |
In order to ensure continuous and effective contribution from the Member States to the achievement by Eurojust of its objectives, the national member should be required to have his regular place of work at the seat of Eurojust. |
(5) |
It is necessary to define a common basis of powers which every national member should have in his capacity as a competent national authority acting in accordance with national law. Some of these powers should be granted to the national member for urgent cases where it is not possible for him to identify or to contact the competent national authority in a timely manner. It is understood that these powers will not have to be exercised in so far as it is possible to identify and to contact the competent authority. |
(6) |
This Decision does not affect the manner in which the Member States organise their internal judicial system or administrative procedures for the designation of the national member and the setting up of the internal working of the national desks at Eurojust. |
(7) |
The setting up of an On-Call Coordination (OCC) within Eurojust is necessary to make Eurojust available around the clock and to enable it to intervene in urgent cases. It should be the responsibility of each Member State to ensure that their representatives in the OCC are able to act on a 24-hour/7-day basis. |
(8) |
Member States should ensure that competent national authorities respond without undue delay to requests made under this Decision, even if competent national authorities refuse to comply with requests made by the national member. |
(9) |
The role of the College should be enhanced in cases of conflict of jurisdiction and in cases of recurrent refusals or difficulties concerning the execution of requests for, and decisions on, judicial cooperation, including regarding instruments giving effect to the principle of mutual recognition. |
(10) |
Eurojust national coordination systems should be set up in the Member States to coordinate the work carried out by the national correspondents for Eurojust, the national correspondent for Eurojust for terrorism matters, the national correspondent for the European Judicial Network and up to three other contact points of the European Judicial Network, as well as representatives in the Networks for Joint Investigation Teams, War Crimes, Asset Recovery... |
More
This text has been adopted from EUR-Lex.
This dossier is compiled each night drawing from aforementioned sources through automated processes. We have invested a great deal in optimising the programming underlying these processes. However, we cannot guarantee the sources we draw our information from nor the resulting dossier are without fault.
This page is also available in a full version containing the legal context, de Europese rechtsgrond, other dossiers related to the dossier at hand and the related cases of the European Court of Justice.
The full version is available for registered users of the EU Monitor by ANP and PDC Informatie Architectuur.
The EU Monitor enables its users to keep track of the European process of lawmaking, focusing on the relevant dossiers. It automatically signals developments in your chosen topics of interest. Apologies to unregistered users, we can no longer add new users.This service will discontinue in the near future.