About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


9 New J. Eur. Crim. L. 3 (2018)

handle is hein.journals/newjecla9 and id is 1 raw text is: Editorial NJECL NewJournal of European Criminal Law 2018, Vol. 9(1) 3 The evolving relationship ©@ The Author(s) 2018 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOl: 10.1 177/2032284418761061 njecl.sagepub corn criminal law and national n*clsgepbcr OSAGE constitutional law: Lessons from the Taricco litigation The Taricco litigation before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the Italian Constitutional Court has generated a number of fundamental questions about the relationship between European criminal law and national constitutional law and about the impact of EU law on domestic criminal justice systems. The ensuing dialogue between the two Courts has resulted in a considerable degree of mutual accommodation, while leaving a number of issues unresolved. This issue brings together a number of contributions which examine critically and in detail the many unresolved issues following the latest development in the Taricco litigation, the CJEU ruling in the case C-42/17, M.A.S. and MB. (or Taricco II) delivered on 5 December 2017. The trigger for this special issue has been a 'rapid reaction' seminar on this ruling which was organized by the Criminal Justice Centre at Queen Mary University of London and took place in London on 22 January 2018. The seminar brought together four leading criminal law academics from Italy - Stefano Manacorda, Rosaria Sicurella, Francesco Vigano and Vittorio Manes, who also litigated Taricco II in Luxembourg. We are fortunate to have secured the contributions of all four speakers for this special issue, along with a contribution by one of the leading early career researchers in European Criminal Law, Fabio Giuffrida (who is based at Queen Mary), and a contribution by myself The special commentary issue provides a number of important and critical insights on the plethora of legal issues arising from the Taricco litigation. These include the scope and interpreta- tion of the principle of legality in relation to limitation periods, the impact of EU harmonization on the criminal law on PIF on domestic systems, and the impact of the Taricco rulings not only on subsequent law and practice in Italy but also on subsequent case law in Luxembourg. But the contributions grapple also with the broader and key issue of the relationship between European criminal law and national constitutional law and the role that judicial dialogue plays in this context. The Taricco saga has raised a number of fundamental questions regarding the applicability of EU law constitutional principles including primacy, effectiveness and direct effect in the face of serious constitutional objections at national level. The judicial dialogue in the Taricco litigation has resulted in a remarkable degree of pragmatism and mutual accommodation between the Italian Constitutional Court and the CJEU - however, contributions in this issue demonstrate in various ways that many of the key underlying issues remain unsettled and that the emergence of fresh constitutional and criminal law questions in view of the growing emphasis by the EU legislator on the protection of the EU financial interests is only a matter of time. Valsamis Mitsilegas Queen Mary University of London, UK