Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ne bis in idem and Conflicts of Jurisdiction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of European Criminal Procedure

Abstract

Section 10.1, deals with the meaning and the limits of the guarantee of ne bis in idem (which protects an individual who has already been acquitted or convicted with a final decision by one State from the potential to be subjected to a new criminal proceeding in another State for the same fact, with the consequent risk of a duplicate punishment) in the ECHR system (where the ne bis in idem principle represents a fundamental right of the individual) and in the Criminal Judicial Cooperation area (where the ne bis in idem guarantee can be also placed in the specific dimension of the mutual recognition). From this perspective, Sect. 10.1 deals in particular with the evolution of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice on this matter. Section 10.2 is focused on the problem of lis pendens (i.e., the simultaneous beginning of criminal proceedings for the same fact against the same person within different States), pointing out the best solutions to prevent or to resolve it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Further Reading

  • Aguilera Morales F, Hernan MC (2011) El principio non bis in idem a la luz dela jurisprudencia del Tribunal de justicia. Arch. pen., pp 3 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Allegrezza S (2012) Art. 4 Prot. 7. In: Bartole S, Conforti B, Zagrebelski V (eds) Commentario breve alla Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo. Cedam, Padova, pp 897 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Amalfitano C (2006) Conflitti di giurisdizione e riconoscimento delle decisioni penali nell’Unione europea. Giuffrè, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartsch HJ (2002) Ne bis in idem. The European perspective. Rev Int de droit pénal, pp 1163 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Blockel BV (2010) The ne bis in idem principle. EU law, pp 217 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Bose M (2003) Der Grudsatz “ne bis in idem” in der EU. Goltdammer’s Archiv, pp 744 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey G (2008) The principle of Ne bis in idem in criminal proceedings. Irish Crim Law J 18(1):2 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Copain C (2013) Le principe ne bis in idem: entre hamornisation et dissonance européennes. Actualité Juridique Pénal, pp 270 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • De Amicis G (2014) Ne bis in idem e “doppio binario” sanzionatorio: prime riflessioni sugli effetti della sentenza “Grande Stevens” nell'ordinamento italiano. Dir. pen. cont. – Riv. trim. (3–4), pp 201 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • De La Cuesta JL (2002) Concurrent national and international criminal jurisdiction and the principle “ne bis in idem”. General Report Rev int droit pénal, pp 725 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Duesberg E (2017) Das Vollstreckungselement des Art. 54 SDÜ im Spannungsfeld zwischen Europäisierung und nationalen Sicherheitsinteressen. Plädoyer fÜr einen vermittelnden Standpunkt. Zeitschrift fÜr Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik, pp 66 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher M (2003) Some developments to the ne bis in idem principles in the European Union. Mod Law Rev 66:769 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher M (2007) The problem of multiple criminal prosecutions: buildings an effective EU response. Yearb Eur Law, pp 33 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaeta P (2014) Gerarchie e antinomie di interpretazioni conformi nella materia penale: il caso del ne bis in idem. Cass pen., pp 1863 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Galantini N (2011) Il ne bis idem nello spazio giudiziario europeo: traguardi e prospettive. www.dirittopenalecontemporaneo.it., 24 February 2011

  • Garin A (2016) Non bis in idem et Convention européenne des droits de l’homme - Du nébuleux au clair-obscur: état des lieux d’un principe ambivalent. Rev. trim. droits de l’homme, pp 395 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochmayr G (ed) (2015) “Ne bis in idem” in Europa. Praxis, Probleme und Perspektiven des Doppelverfolgungsverbots. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochmayr G, Ligocki D (2016) Der Strafregisteraustausch in der Europäischen Union und das Recht auf Resozialisierung. Zeitschrift fÜr Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik, pp 159 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiafa-Gbandi M (2017) Jurisdictional conflicts in criminal matters and their settlement within EU’s supranational settings. Eur Crim Law Rev (1), pp 30 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Klip A, Van Der Wilt H (2002) Ne bis in idem. Rev. int. dr. pénal, pp 1095 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Kniebuhler RM (2005) Transnationales “ne bis in idem”. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Lelieur J (2005) La règle ne bis in idem. Thése pour le Doctorat en Droit. Université Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Lelieur J (2013a) “Transnationalising” ne bis in idem: how the rule of ne bis in idem reveals the principle of personal legal certainty. Utrecht Law Rev 9:198 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Lelieur J (2013b) L’Union européenne face aux conflits de compétence pénales. Questions de droit pénal international, européen et compare. Mélanges en l’honneur du professeur Alain Fournier. Presses universitaires de Nancy - Editions universitaires de Lorraine, pp 257 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Ligeti K (2009) Rules on the application of ne bis in idem in the EU. Is further legislative action required? Eucrim (1–2), pp 37 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Ligeti K, Simonato M (2014) Multidisciplinary investigations into offences against the financial interests of the EU: a quest for an integrated enforcement concept. In: Galli F, Weyembergh A (eds) Do labels still matter? Blurring boundaries between administrative and criminal law. The influence of the EU. Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, pp 81 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupària L (2012) La litispendenza internazionale tra ne bis in idem europeo e processo penale italiano. Giuffrè, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Marletta A (2017) A new course for mutual trust in the AFSJ? Transnational ne bis in idem and the determination of the merits of the case in Kossowski. New J Eur Crim Law 8(2):108 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Maulet L (2017) Le principe ne bis in idem, objet d’un “dialogue” contrasté entre la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme. Rev. trim. droits de l’homme, pp 107 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsilegas V (2015) The symbiotic relationship between mutual trust and fundamental rights in Europe’s area of criminal justice. New J Eur Crim Law 6(4):457 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Mock H (2009) Ne bis in idem: Strasbourg tranche en faveur de l’identité des faits. Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (Grande Chambre), Zolotoukhine c. Russie, 10 février 2009. Rev. trim. droits de l’homme, pp 867 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Panayides P (2006) Conflicts of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings: analysis and possible improvements to the EU legal framework. Rev int de droit penal, pp 113 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulesu PP (2016) Riflessioni in tema di ne bis in idem europeo, Riv dir proc, pp 638 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafaraci T (2008) Procedural safeguards and the principle of ne bis in idem in the European Union. In: Bassiouni MC, Militello V, Satzger H (eds) European cooperation in penal matters: issues and perspectives. Cedam, Padova, pp 363 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts P (2002) Double Jeopardy law reform: a criminal justice commentary. Mod Law Rev, pp 393 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarmiento D (2007) El principio ne bis in idem en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Comunidad Europea. In: Zapatero LA, Martin AN (eds) El principio ne bis in idem en el Derecho penal europeo e internacional. Ediciones De La Universidad De Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, pp 56 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Schomburg W (2012) Criminal matters: transnational ne bis in idem in Europe – conflicts of jurisdiction – transfer of proceedings. ERA Forum 13(3):331 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieber U, Brüner FH, Satzger H, Von Heintschel-Heinegg B (eds) (2011) Europaieshes Strafrecht. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Spinellis D (2002) The ne bis in idem principle in “global” instruments. Rev int de droit pénal, pp 1149 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorhauer NI (2015) Conflicts of jurisdiction in cross-border criminal cases in the area of freedom, security, and justice: risks and opportunities from an individual rights-oriented perspective. New J Eur Crim Law, pp 78 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Vander Beken T, Vermeulen G, Ongena T (2002) Concurrent national and international criminal jurisdiction and the principle “ne bis in idem”. Rev int dr pénal, pp 818 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Vervaele JAE (2004) Case law. Common Mark Law Rev 41:804 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Vervaele JAE (2005) The transnational ne bis in idem principle in the EU. Mutual recognition and equivalent protection of human rights. Utrecht Law Rev, pp 100 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Vervaele JAE (2006) Multilevel and multiple punishment in Europe. The ne bis in idem principle and the protection of human rights in Europe’s area of freedom, security and justice. In: van Hoek A et al (eds) Multilevel governance in enforcement and adjudication. Intersentia, Antwerpen, pp 1 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Vervaele JAE (2013) Ne bis in idem. Towards a transnational constitutional principle in the EU? Utrecht Law Rev, pp 211 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Viganò F (2014) Doppio binario sanzionatorio e ne bis in idem: verso una diretta applicazione dell'Art. 50 della Carta? (a margine della sentenza Grande Stevens della Corte Edu). Dir. pen. cont. – Riv. trim. (3–4), pp 219 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Wesmeier M (2006) The principle of ne bis in idem. Rev int de droit penal, pp 121 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Wesmeier M, Thwaites M (2006) The development of ne bis in idem into a transnational fundamental right in EU law: comments on recent developments. Eur Law Rev pp 565 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasmeier M. (2014) ne bis in idem and the enforcement condition. New J Eur Crim Law pp 548 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyembergh A (2004) Le principe ne bis in idem: pierre d'achoppement de l'espace pènal européen? Cahiers droiteur., pp 337 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyembergh A (2013) Le Principe Non Bis In Idem: Une Contribution Essentielle De La CJUE. In: Court of Justice of the European Union (ed) The Court of Justice and the construction of Europe: analyses and perspectives on sixty years of case law. Curia, Asser Press, Springer, Luxembourg, The Hague, Heidelberg, pp 539 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyembergh A, Joncheray N (2016) Punitive administrative sanctions and procedural safeguards: a blurred picture that needs to be addressed. New J Eur Crim Law 7(2):190 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyngaert CV, Stessens G (1999) The international non bis in idem principle: resolving some unanswered questions. Int Comp Law Q 48:779 ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann F (2015) Conflicts of criminal jurisdiction in the European Union. Bergen J Crim Law Crim Justice, pp 1 ff

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of Padua, Padua, Italy

    Pier Paolo Paulesu

Authors
  1. Pier Paolo Paulesu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pier Paolo Paulesu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of Padua, Padua, Italy

    Roberto E. Kostoris

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Paulesu, P.P. (2018). Ne bis in idem and Conflicts of Jurisdiction. In: Kostoris, R. (eds) Handbook of European Criminal Procedure. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72462-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72462-1_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72461-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72462-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation