Convergence between the echr and the cjeu regarding the risk of vulneration of fundamental rights as ground for non-execution of European arrest warrants. An analysis on the judgment of the ECHR of 9 July 2019, Romeo Castaño
Revista de Derecho Comunitario Europeo, ISSN: 1989-5569, Vol: 2020, Issue: 65, Page: 167-187
2020
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In its judgment in the case Romeo Castaño, the ECHR has determined that Belgium violated Article 2 of the ECHR under its procedural aspect by failing to uphold its obligation to cooperate in criminal matters and, more specifically, by denying the execution of a European Arrest Warrant without a proper justification of the risk of violation of fundamental rights of the person requested in case of being transferred to Spain. Along with a review of the main aspects of this case, the present analysis frames the reasoning of the ECHR within the recent changes made by the CJEU regarding the principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters, and finally concludes that there the approach between these two courts may facilitate to overcome the obstacles created by Opinion 2/13 to the accession of the EU to the ECHR.
Bibliographic Details
Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know