| Abstract |
One critical element of interagency and international cooperation in the\n area of criminal justice is whether organizations - and more generally\n countries - can trust one another to follow through on agreements that\n have been mutually established, such as the utilization of a home\n country\'s alternatives to incarceration. This paper builds on the\n existing literature on mutual trust and adds more empirical data\n regarding how competent authorities in the European Union (EU) perceive\n the mutual trust concept in day-to-day practice. In our examination of\n mutual trust, we draw on an EU survey and three interviews with\n judiciary members in Spain. Based on our review of the survey findings\n and interview data, we find that, although mutual trust is essential for\n all mutual recognition instruments in the EU, its dimensions are far\n from being fully understood. Whilst the political discourse at the EU\n level presumes the "pure" existence of the mutual trust, both the\n European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights\n recognize its limitations, especially when human rights standards are in\n question. Scholars have also started to challenge the absolute existence\n of mutual trust independent of any determinants. This paper adds to this\n debate by illustrating how mutual trust is not only complex and dynamic\n but also selective and differential. It seems that different\n problem-solving strategies in the field of criminal and juvenile justice\n demand different levels of mutual trust, and mutual trust appears to\n manifest itself more with some Member States than with others. |
Gestionar cookies