The European Public Prosecutor’s Office: How Should the Rules Applicable to its Procedure be Determined?

The fact that the European Public Prosecutor's Office is provided for in the Treaty is undoubtedly a very important step. At the same time, Art. 86 TFEU is one of the most delicate provisions of the new Treaty. It is sensitive both from a political and a legal point of view: The establishment of the EPPO - both because of its strong symbolic value and because of the potential powers it may have - clearly challenges Member States' sovereignty and the powers, institutional organisation and realistic aspirations of existing EU criminal justice bodies. On the other hand, from the legal point of view, its implementation raises a list of questions without straightforward answers. The present article shall start with an overview of the history of the EPPO followed by a brief analysis of the legal confines of Art. 86 TFEU and the policy debates linked to it. In order to assess the implementation of the EPPO, the policy, institutional and legislative developments in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice will be described. Special attention will be paid to the advocated role of mutual recognition. Based on the preliminary findings of the comparative study on the 'EU model rules of criminal investigation and prosecution for the procedure of the proposed European Public Prosecutor's Office' conducted by the author, it will be argued that the EPPO may rely on mutual recognition only to a limited extent. Reprinted by permission of Hart Publishing