Judgment_paragraph 3 · Criminal proceedings against D. d.o.o (C-8/24)

3Recitals 1 to 4, 11 to 13, 18, 31 and 34 of Regulation 2018/1805 state:(1) The [European] Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice.(2) Judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union is based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions, which has commonly been referred to as the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in criminal matters within the Union since the Tampere European Council of 15 and 16 October 1999.(3) The freezing and the confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime are among the most effective means of combating crime. …(4) As crime is often transnational in nature, effective cross-border cooperation is essential in order to freeze and confiscate the instrumentalities and proceeds of crime.…(11) In order to ensure the effective mutual recognition of freezing orders and confiscation orders, the rules on the recognition and execution of those orders should be established by a legally binding and directly applicable act of the Union.(12) It is important to facilitate the mutual recognition and execution of freezing orders and confiscation orders by establishing rules that oblige a Member State to recognise, without further formalities, the freezing orders and confiscation orders issued by another Member State within the framework of proceedings in criminal matters and to execute those orders within its territory.(13) This Regulation should apply to all freezing orders and to all confiscation orders issued within the framework of proceedings in criminal matters. “Proceedings in criminal matters” is an autonomous concept of Union law interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union, notwithstanding the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The term therefore covers all types of freezing orders and confiscation orders issued following proceedings in relation to a criminal offence, not only orders covered by Directive [2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the freezing and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union (OJ 2014 L 127, p. 39)]. It also covers other types of order issued without a final conviction. While such orders might not exist in the legal system of a Member State, the Member State concerned should be able to recognise and execute such an order issued by another Member State. Proceedings in criminal matters could also encompass criminal investigations by the police and other law enforcement authorities. Freezing orders and confiscation orders that are issued within the framework of proceedings in civil or administrative matters should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation.…(18) The procedural rights set out in [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 (OJ 2010 L 280, p. 1), Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings (OJ 2012 L 142, p. 1), 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 (OJ 2013 L 294, p. 1), Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ 2016 L 65, p. 1)], … should apply, within the scope of those Directives, to criminal proceedings covered by this Regulation as regards the Member States bound by those Directives. In any case, the safeguards under the Charter should apply to all proceedings covered by this Regulation. In particular, the essential safeguards for criminal proceedings set out in the Charter should apply to proceedings in criminal matters that are not criminal proceedings but which are covered by this Regulation.…(31) The recognition and execution of a freezing order or confiscation order should not be refused on grounds other than those provided for in this Regulation. ……(34) The creation of an area of freedom, security and justice within the Union is based on mutual trust and a presumption of compliance by other Member States with Union law and, in particular, with fundamental rights. However, in exceptional situations, where there are substantial grounds to believe, on the basis of specific and objective evidence, that the execution of a freezing order or confiscation order would, in the particular circumstances of the case, entail a manifest breach of a relevant fundamental right as set out in the Charter, the executing authority should be able to decide not to recognise and execute the order concerned. The fundamental rights that should be relevant in this respect are, in particular, the right to an effective remedy, the right to a fair trial and the right of defence. The right to property should, in principle, not be relevant because freezing and confiscation of assets necessarily imply an interference with a person’s right to property and because the necessary safeguards in that respect are already provided for in Union law, including in this Regulation.’