Measure A: Translation and Interpretation

Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings

For the implementation report click here.

Measure B: Information on Rights and Information about the Charges

Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings

For the implementation report click here.

Measure C: Legal Advice and Legal Aid

Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty.

For the implementation report click here.

Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings.

Measure D: Communication with Relatives, Employers and Consular Authorities

Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty.

No implementation report has been made available yet.

Measure E: Special Safeguards for Suspected or Accused Persons who are Vulnerable

Directive (EU) 2016/800 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings.

No implementation report has been made available yet.

Measure F: A Green Paper on the Right to Review of the Grounds for Pre-Trial Detention

There is no directive yet on measure F.

This section charts the development of the EU proposals on procedural safeguards from 2004 to the present day and the ECBAs contribution to the discussion.

For the related Working Group and Roadmap 2020 please click here.

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE ACADEMY OF EUROPEAN LAW

As the ECBA is a partner of the Academy of European Law also regarding this subject, we recommend that you consult the list of resources on their site. 

You can check their related project here.

In April 2018, in response to the perception that traditional mechanisms for international data sharing were hindering the acquisition of electronic evidence, the European Commission proposed a Regulation on European Production Orders (EPO) and European Preservation Orders (EPrO) for electronic evidence.

In February 2019, the ECBA issued its detailed response to the proposal which, whilst acknowledging the significance of electronic evidence in criminal justice and the need for timely access to it by law enforcement authorities, expressed grave concern at the proposal as originally formulated.

The full ECBA response to the proposal can be found here but, in summary, the E-evidence Working Group was concerned at the Commission’s disregard for ways to enhance existing cross-border co-operation measures, the inherent jeopardy for the protection of legally privileged material, the potential for disproportionate requests by issuing authorities, inadequate protection for the ne bis in idem principle, the risk of conflict with the GDPR, and the inadequate procedures for dealing with potential conflicts of law. The ECBA called for the implementation of specific safeguards which might form the basis for wider international co-operation in the sharing of electronic evidence.

The draft Regulation proved highly controversial and a source of contention between the European Parliament and the Commission. One of the main points of dispute was whether and how the authorities of the country in which the relevant online service provider is located (the ‘enforcing authority’) should be involved in the EPO and EPrO process. In June 2023, the European Council and Parliament agreed a compromise text of the draft Regulation, which entered into the Official Journal of the European Union in July 2023 (regulation: L 191, 28, p. 118 ff., directive: directive : L 191, 28, p. 181 ff.).

Aspects of the Regulation remain open to criticism. For example, while the grounds for refusing to enforce an OPO include where the data requested is legally privileged, the ability of the enforcing authority (or of the service provider) to identify such material may well be constrained by differing international definitions of legal professional privilege, particularly where, as a result of the Regulation’s non-disclosure provisions, the person whose data is requested is unaware of the EPO and may not be consulted. These ‘gagging’ provisions may remain in force for an indeterminate period at the discretion of the issuing authority. Likewise, the Regulation remains vague on the remedies available to those whose data is obtained via EPOs, leaving these to the national laws of issuing states, potentially raising barriers such as language and travel to effective redress.

Nevertheless, several of the ECBA’s recommendations have been adopted in the Regulation. For example, EPOs issued for traffic and content data must include, inter alia, the grounds for believing the order is necessary and proportionate, as well as a summary description of the case; the issuing authority must normally inform the enforcing authority of the EPO and provide them with the detailed information stipulated in the Regulation when the order is made. However, the issuing authority is not obliged to notify the enforcing authority if the sole purpose of a request for specific types of data (e.g. IP addresses and time stamps) is to identify the user. Likewise, the various grounds under the Regulation on which the enforcing authority may refuse an EPO are restricted to requests for traffic and content data – there is no right to refuse EPOs where the data requested is for the sole purpose of identifying the user.

Going some way to meet the ECBA’s call for a dual criminality requirement, EPOs may only be issued if a similar order could have been issued under the same conditions in a similar domestic case; meaningful engagement and scrutiny by service providers may be ensured by providing for the reimbursement of their costs under national laws; and to ensure data minimisation is observed, strict time limits will apply to the duration of EPrOs.

With the exception of Denmark, the Regulation will apply throughout the EU from 18 August 2026. An evaluation of the legislation, including its impact on fundamental rights, must take place by August 2029, providing the ECBA with a useful opportunity to give expert feedback on the practical operation of the Regulation and the professional experience of its members.

The ECBA thanks rapporteurs Stefanie Schott and Julian Hayes for their ongoing work on the organisation’s response to the Regulation.

As the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) became operational as of June 2021, the ECBA brought into force a working group to reflect on defence issues and procedural rights in EPPO proceedings.

Creating a new criminal procedure for a new institution is a complex matter, in which defence rights should be fully acknowledged and protected. 

The working group focuses on the lack of specific regulations of defence and procedural rights, the impact on the rights of the suspect at the national level and problems relating to access to the case file.

The working group’s aim is to identify the relevant defence issues and to advise the members of the ECBA on how to handle them. The WG  also interacts with the EPPO in order to convey the views of practitioners and help to build a practice that is in conformity with the highest standards of a fair trial and the rights of individuals.

Since June 2022 the WG organises an online meeting every last Friday of the month to discuss practical issues and experiences regarding EPPO cases from different countries.

If you are interested in joining the working group, the practical sessions or simply want to discuss, please contact This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

As defined by its constitution, one the objects of the ECBA is to promote the administration of justice and human rights under the rule of law within the member states of the Council of Europe and among the peoples of the world. Throughout the years the ECBA has been following Criminal Proceedings’ Human Rights’ issues.

If you know of any issue that should be brought to our attention, please do not hesitate to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. 

The increasing involvement of the ECBA in advocacy for Human Rights in Criminal Proceedings has led the ECBA to appoint a Human Rights Officer (HRO). The Human Rights Officer (HRO) will be the contact person for Human Rights’ issues, including  possible interventions by the ECBA before the ECtHR, and will represent the ECBA in activities such as trial observations.

The first ECBA-HRO was the Advisory Board Member Scott Crosby. Scott was a long time member of the ECBA and had a wide experience in taking cases to the European Court of Human Rights. As Scott Crosby sadly passed away on 25 April 2020, Alexis Anagnostakis has been appointed by the Executive Committee of the ECBA as the actual HR Officer on 21 September 2020. 

Given that the demands of human rights law for the work of the ECBA were steadily increasing and could not be adequately met by the Human Rights Officer alone the Executive and Advisory boards of the ECBA decided at the meeting of 21 April 2017 in Prague, Czech Republic, to establish a human rights committee.

The Human Rights Committee (HRC) comprise the undernoted persons:

The ECBA “Scott Crosby” Human Rights Award 

The ECBA and their Human Rights Committee have decided to institutionalize the ECBA Human Rights Award, named after our late friend and passionate human rights activist Scott Crosby, to be awarded once a year to distinguished lawyers who have demonstrated outstanding commitment and sacrifice to uphold fundamental values.

The objective of the ECBA is to honour the efforts of lawyers and at the same time raise awareness of the core values of the legal profession. 

The 2024 ECBA HR Award went to three Belarus lawyers who endure the harsh conditions of Belarusian prisons, having been arrested and sentenced to 6-10 years in prison, with no phone calls, correspondence or visits. Vitaly Brahinets, Aliaksandr Danilevich, and Maxim Znak are suffering today because of their unwavering dedication to justice, democracy, and human rights. 

Vitaly Brahinets, a seasoned criminal lawyer, is recognized for his support of human rights. By choosing to represent those targeted by political oppression, he has faced imprisonment on charges that are widely acknowledged as politically motivated. Aliaksandr Danilevich has shown remarkable bravery amid the political crisis in Belarus. He openly denounced the war in Ukraine while providing legal assistance to those repressed by the government. The result was the same: arrested and detained. Maxim Znak has also played a vital role in providing legal support to opposition figures. His relentless pursuit of justice and democracy resulted in his arrest, making him a symbol of the struggle for human rights and the rule of law.

The Award was handed to Iryna Kozikava, sister of Maxim Znak and a lawyer herself, who seeked refuge in Poland.

The 2023 ECBA HR Award went to two remarkable women - Françoise Tulkens, a distinguished Belgian lawyer and a respected expert in criminal law, former Vice-President of the European Court of Human Rights and Nancy Hollander, a renowned U.S. criminal defense lawyer, known for her fearless representation of Guantanamo Bay detainees and the prominent whistleblower, Chelsea Manning. The award ceremony took place at the Spring Conference 2024 in Brussels, in the presence of Scott Crosby's daughter and son, Francesca and Andrew, who handed the awards themselves.

The ECBA Scott Crosby Human Rights Award 2022, handed by Vincent Asselineau, ECBA Chair, and Alexis Anagnostakis, HR Officer, went to the Ukrainian National Bar Association, represented at the Autumn Conference by Dr. Valentyn Gvozdiy, Vice President of the UNBA and ECBA member. The award honours the efforts of the Ukrainian lawyers for their determination and sacrifice in times of war, to uphold fundamental values and the rule of law in their country during the current impermissible military aggression against Ukraine. 

The receivers of the ECBA Human Rights Award 2021 were Judge Igor Tuleya and the Dean of the Warsaw Bar Association, lawyer Mikołaj Pietrzak, both from Poland.

HR Officer Alexis Anagnostakis, ECBA Chair Vincent Asselineau and Polish lawyer Mikołaj Pietrzak

At the level of the EU, corruption is considered as one of the main challenges for European societies. Early in 2014, the EU Commission released its first anti-corruption report (not available online anymore, the project was dropped, details here) and in 2015, DG Migration and Home Affairs of the European Commission launched an “Anti-corruption experience sharing programme” to “support Member States, local NGOs and other stakeholders in addressing specific challenges identified in the EU Anti-Corruption Report” [1]. 

Also, bribing foreign officials has become a crime in most countries, triggered by international legal instruments, like the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. The risk of criminal prosecution for multinational companies and individuals has further increased due to national legislation with jurisdictions going beyond the national borders, such as the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or the UK Bribery Act 2010.

Post-Covid, corruption is even more widespread and entrenched in many sectors of public life. The fight against corruption continues to be among the EU’s top political priorities, however, the current EU legal framework on corruption is outdated and incomplete. There is still no legally binding instrument at the EU level to tackle corruption, i.e. the Anti-Corruption Directive

The EU Commission plans to update EU rules, including the creation of international standards such as the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), binding in the EU. [2] 

The objective of those measures is to ensure that all forms of corruption are criminalised in all Member States, that legal persons may also be held responsible for such offences, and that these offences incur effective, proportionate, and dissuasive penalties

Considering the above the ECBA created a working group on anti-corruption and bribery in Europe (ACE).

Anti-Corruption in Europe (ACE)

The ECBA shares the view that the fight against corruption and the protection of fundamental rights are complementary and not conflicting objectives. At the same time, implementing and enforcing the criminalization of corruption has to be carried out in full respect of fundamental rights and rule of law principles.

 
Aims and Tasks

In this light, the purpose of the ACE WG is to improve knowledge and awareness among defence practitioners of various anti-corruption instruments (and related legislation such as Anti Money Laundering Instruments), and procedural and other ECHR safeguards in anti-corruption cases (where such safeguards may be diluted due to the significant public interest in fighting against corruption, including confiscation), in order to provide effective advice and representation.

In addition, the WG also aims to inform and advocate on procedural and other ECHR safeguards in cases of corporate criminal liability and the application of these safeguards to legal entities i.e. their representatives.

The WG aims to participate in consultations in the EU legislative process and to publish statements in response to any proposed new measures. The ACE WG will work closely with the EPPO WG given the proximity of their scope.

Initiatives

The group has initiated several knowledge-sharing activities, partnered with big4 audit firms and Chambers of Commerce on awareness raising events, participated at various conferences (i.e. 1st Hellenic Anti-Corruption Conference), designed a simulation model cross-border case, participated in tender processes for relevant projects, delivered in-house training, etc. ACE has so far issued 9 country reports on the topic and established a European-wide network of contacts with experience in corruption cases.

In 2023 the ACE WG published an ECBA Statement on the new EU Commission proposed Directive on Combating Corruption. In 2024, the WG participated at the First Anti-corruption Forum in Ukraine on the topic of Peculiarities of Consideration of Corruption Cases under Martial Law. ACE gave an interview to a prominent Ukrainian legal magazine highlighting the purpose of ACE on increasing the level of knowledge and awareness among practicing lawyers regarding various anticorruption instruments, as well as procedural and other guarantees of the European Convention on Human Rights in corruption cases. According to the organizers, the

interview received many positive reviews from Ukrainian colleagues, including both judges and lawyers. ACE recently organised the joint ECBA’s response to the EC questionnaire on AML related issues titled 'Evaluation of Directive (EU) 2018/1673: Questionnaire for NGOs, think-tanks, academic institutions & European associations'.

Future initiatives

ACE will incorporate the work of the now defunct ECBA money laundering project from 15 years ago. There is a plan to update country reports on their anti-corruption legal framework. Members are invited to identify and bring attention to potential new areas of development of the WG’s work. The group is being co-chaired by Amedeo Barletta and Vladimir Hrle.

The members of ACE are:

• Alexis Anagnostakis (Greece)
• Adriana de Buerba (Spain)
• Jurjan Geertsma (The Netherlands)
• Tamás Gerö (Hungary)
• Wiliam Glover (Ireland)
• Nina Karačić Brković (Bosnia and Herzegovina)
• Albert Janet (France)
• Mihai Mareș (Romania)
• Anna Oehmichen (Germany)
• Juan Palomino (Spain)
• Olga Prosyanyuk (Ukraine)
• Andrea Puccio (Italy)
• Veronica Spiteri (Malta)
• Jaanus Tehver (Estonia)
• Chris Whalley (United Kingdom)

 [1] Cf.

https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/internal-security/corruption/how-eu-helps-member-states-fight-corruption_en 

[2] Cf.

https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d7a6cfdb-8fcb-11ed-b508-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

ECBA Statement on the new proposed Directive on Combating Corruption  - November 2023

Overview on anti-corruption rules and regulations - country reports

The ECBA has launched a Working Group (WG) in order to discuss the use of remote video-technologies in criminal cases and has drafted an European Criminal Bar Association Statement of Principles on the use of Video-Conferencing in Criminal Cases in a Post-Covid-19 World. The statement has been officially launched at our Spring Conference in Rome, on the 12th September 2020, during a panel dedicated to the subject. The paper was submitted to the EC Consultation on 14 September 2020.

Rapporteurs
Alexis Anagnostakis, Amedeo Barletta, Nicola Canestrini, Vânia Costa Ramos and Jaanus Tehver. 

Members of the WG
Constance Ascione le Dréau, Adriana de Buerba, Bugnariu Dănuţ-Ioan, Deborah Hondius, Vladimir Hrle, Gwen Jansen, Robin Lööf, Finn Meinel, Rebecca Niblock, Anna Oehmichen, Juan Palomino, Mikolaj Pietrzak, Maria Radziejowska, Adrian Sandru, Demetra Sorvatizioti, Petra van Kampen.

In this section you will find all past projects of the ECBA.