Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law

Auke Willems is Lecturer in EU Law at the University of Liverpool and a Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Sciences.

• Introduction 1. The Topic of the Book: Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law 2. The Main Objective: Demystifying the Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law 3. Relevance 4. The Structure 5. Methodology 6. Scope and Delineation 1. What is Trust? A Social Science Perspective 1. Introduction 2. Towards a Body of Social Science Literature on Trust: Developing an Underdeveloped Term 3. Trust: We (Th ink We) Know it When We See it 4. Dissecting Trust: Risks and Interests as Key Aspects of Trust Relationships 5. Clarifying the Concept of Trust: More Specificity Please 6. Applying a Trust Framework to the EU Criminal Law Context 7. Conclusion 2. Institutional Architecture of EU Criminal Law: Mutual Recognition as the ‘Cornerstone of Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters’ 1. Introduction 2. Institutional Development of EU Cooperation in Criminal Matters: Four Eras 3. The Principles of Mutual Recognition and Mutual Trust in EU Law 4. Mutual Recognition: ‘The Cornerstone of Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters’ 5. Applying Mutual Recognition to EU Criminal Law 6. Conclusion 3. The ‘Flagship’ Mutual Recognition Instrument: The European Arrest Warrant and Trust Issues 1. Introduction 2. The European Arrest Warrant: A Revolution in Extradition? 3. The Success of the European Arrest Warrant: Mixed Messages 4. National Constitutional Challenges to the Validity of the European Arrest Warrant: Signals of Distrust? 5. Difficulties with the European Arrest Warrant in Practice: Trust Issues? 6. Conclusion 4. The Court of Justice of the European Union and the Evolution of Mutual Trust 1. Introduction 2. Establishing the Trust Presumption: The EU-Wide Application of ne bis in idem 3. The Validity of the European Arrest Warrant: Advocaten voor de Wereld 4. A Nationality Exception? Kozlowski, Wolzenburg and Lopez de Silva Jorge 5. The Relationship between Mutual Recognition and Mutual Trust under Examination in Mantello 6. The First Rebuttal of the Trust Presumption in NS and ME 7. A Human Rights Refusal Ground under the European Arrest Warrant Post-NS? Not Yet 8. Opinion 2/13: A Showcase of the Importance of (the Presumption of) Mutual Trust 9. A Change of Direction: Rebutting the Trust Presumption: Lanigan, Aranyosi and LM 10. Conclusion 5. Mutual Trust in the EU Criminal Law Discourse: From Confidence to Doubt 1. Introduction 2. First Articulation of the Presumption of Mutual Trust Following Tampere 3. Growing Doubts on the Validity of the Trust Presumption 4. A Direct Link between Enhancing Mutual Recognition and Trust: The Hague Programme 5. Building Trust as a Main Objective of the Stockholm Programme 6. Observing Fading Trust in Secondary Legislation: From the European Arrest Warrant to the EuropeanInvestigation Order 7. The 2020 Justice Agenda: Mutual Trust as the ‘Bedrock upon which the EU Justice Policy should be Built’ 8. Towards a More Abstract Notion of Trust: From One Commissioner to Another 9. Distilling the EU’s ‘Trust Logic’: Is there One? 10. Conclusion 6. The Trust-Building Policy: An Orchestrated Effort or A Patchwork of Measures? 1. Introduction 2. The Relationship between Mutual Recognition and Harmonisation 3. Legal Trust-Building: Harmonisation of Substantive Criminal Law 4. Legal Trust-Building: Approximation of Procedural Rights 5. Non-Legal and Soft Law Means of Trust Building 6. Building Trust Th rough Agencies: From Eurojust to a European Public Prosecutor 7. Conclusion 7. Critical Development of the Principle of Mutual Trust: A Work in Progress 1. Introduction 2. Mutual Recognition and Trust Academic Literature: Questioning the EU’s Trust Presumption 3. Efforts in Academic Literature to Clarify the Principle of Mutual Trust 4. Wide(r) Relevance of Mutual Trust 5. Invitations for Further Conceptual Development of the Principle of Mutual Trust 6. Conclusion 8. A Transatlantic Perspective: Trust Lessons from a Federal Context 1. Introduction 2. Why Look at the US? 3. The American Decentralised Criminal Justice System 4. Modalities of Criminal Law Cooperation in the US 5. What Lessons for EU Trust-Based Cooperation? 6. Value of US Experience: Harmony and Unity as Drivers of Trust 7. Conclusion 9. Unpacking the Principle of Mutual Trust: Five Building Blocks 1. Introduction 2. Building Block 1: A European Criminal Law Culture 3. Building Block 2: The ‘Europeanisation’ of Fair Trial Rights 4. Building Block 3: Equivalent, but not Identical 5. Building Block 4: Reciprocity, Although not Explicitly6. Building Block 5: The Loyalty Principle. What Kind of Loyalty in EU Criminal Law? 7. Conclusion 10. A Forward-Looking Assessment of Mutual Trust Challenges 1. Introduction 2. The Logic of Trust Building: How is it Supposed to Work? 3. Recommendation 1: Change the Perspective from Formal to Substantive Trust 4. Recommendation 2: Address Fundamental Rights Concerns by Implementing EU Fair Trial Rights 5. Recommendation 3: Non-Legal Trust-Building. The Need for Accurate Information, Monitoring, Evaluation, Education and Training 6. Conclusion Conclusion1. The Multidimensional Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law 2. Mutual Trust: Balancing Divergent Interests in EU Criminal Law 3. A Social Science Inspired Perspective on Trust 4. From Presuming to Rebutting: The Evolution of Mutual Trust 5. The US Comparative Perspective: Lessons from Federal Interstate Cooperation 6. The Substance of the Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law 7. A Look at the Future: How to Improve Mutual Trust? 8. Continuing Research on Mutual Trust

The Principle of Mutual Trust in EU Criminal Law is very timely piece of scholarship, one which adopts a novel approach vis-à-vis the understanding of trust in EU criminal law. While most previous work on mutual trust in EU criminal law has concentrated on EU case law, Willems gives us a theoretical baseline for how to understand trust, one which includes both interdisciplinary and comparative perspectives that are both new, legally sound as well as entertaining to read. It is a very well-researched and well-written book, which will be of use and of great interest to both academics, LLM students as well as to policy makers.