Help us make the FRA website better for you!

Take part in a one-to-one session and help us improve the FRA website. It will take about 30 minutes of your time.

YES, I AM INTERESTED NO, I AM NOT INTERESTED

eu-charter

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Artikel 50 - Ret til ikke at blive retsforfulgt eller straffet to gange for samme lovovertrædelse

Artikel 50 - Ret til ikke at blive retsforfulgt eller straffet to gange for samme lovovertrædelse

Ingen skal i en straffesag på ny kunne stilles for en domstol eller dømmes for en lovovertrædelse, for hvilken den pågældende allerede er blevet endeligt frikendt eller domfældt i en af Unionens medlemsstater i overensstemmelse med lovgivningen.

    • Text:

      Artikel 4 i protokol nr. 7 til EMK har følgende affattelse:

      »1. Under én og samme stats jurisdiktion skal ingen i en straffesag på ny kunne stilles for en domstol eller dømmes for en lovovertrædelse, for hvilken han allerede er blevet endeligt frikendt eller domfældt i overensstemmelse med denne stats lovgivning og strafferetspleje.

      2. Bestemmelserne i foregående stykke forhindrer ikke genoptagelse af sagen i overensstemmelse med vedkommende stats lovgivning og strafferetspleje, såfremt der foreligger bevis for nye eller nyopdagede kendsgerninger, eller såfremt der i den tidligere rettergang er begået en grundlæggende fejl, som kunne påvirke sagens udfald.

      3. Der kan ikke ske fravigelse fra denne artikel i medfør af artikel 15 i konventionen.«

      Non bis in idem-reglen gælder i EU-retten (jf. en omfattende retspraksis, f.eks. dom afsagt den 5. maj 1966 i de, forenede sager 18/65 og 35/65, Gutmann mod Kommissionen Sml. dansk specialudgave s. 175, og en aktuel dom afsagt af Retten den 20. april 1999 i de forenede sager T-305/94 m.fl., Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij NV m.fl. mod Kommissionen, Sml. II, s. 931). Det præciseres, at reglen om ikke-kumulation gælder to sanktioner af samme art, i dette tilfælde strafferetlige sanktioner.

      I henhold til artikel 50 gælder non bis in idem-reglen ikke kun inden for en medlemsstats retsområde, men også mellem flere medlemsstater. Dette svarer til gældende EU-ret, se artikel 54-58 i Schengengennemførelseskonventionen og Domstolens dom af 11. februar 2003, sag C-187/01, Gözütok (Sml. I, s. 1345), artikel 7 i konventionen om beskyttelse af Fællesskabets finansielle interesser og artikel 10 i konventionen om bekæmpelse af bestikkelse. De meget begrænsede undtagelser i disse konventioner, hvorefter medlemsstaterne kan fravige non bis in idem-reglen, er omfattet af den horisontale bestemmelse i chartrets artikel 52, stk. 1, om begrænsninger. For så vidt angår de situationer, der er omhandlet i artikel 4 i nævnte protokol nr. 7, dvs. anvendelsen af princippet inden for én og samme stat, har den rettighed, der sikres, samme betydning og omfang, som den tilsvarende ret i EMK.

      Source:
      Den Europæiske Unions Tidende C 303/17 - 14.12.2007
      Preamble - Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights:
      Disse forklaringer blev oprindelig udarbejdet under præsidiet for den forsamling, der udarbejdede chartret om grundlæggende rettigheder. De er blevet ajourført under Det Europæiske Konvents præsidiums ansvar i lyset af de udkast til tilpasninger, som konventet har foretaget i charterteksten (især i artikel 51 og 52) og videreudviklingen af EU-retten. Selv om forklaringerne ikke i sig selv har retskraft, udgør de et værdifuldt fortolkningsinstrument beregnet til nærmere præcisering af chartrets bestemmelser.
    • Accused v Public Prosecutor
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      National Court/Tribunal
      Deciding body:
      Supreme Court
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2796
    • Finančné riaditeľstvo Slovenskej republiky v BB construct s.r.o.
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      Court of Justice of the European Union
      Deciding body:
      Court (Ninth Chamber)
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Taxation
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:EU:C:2017:820
    • Criminal proceedings against Luca Menci.
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      Court of Justice of the European Union
      Deciding body:
      Advocate General
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:EU:C:2017:667
    • Garlsson Real Estate SA and Others v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      Court of Justice of the European Union
      Deciding body:
      Advocate General
      Type:
      Opinion
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:EU:C:2017:668
    • S.C. v Croatia
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      National Court/Tribunal
      Deciding body:
      Supreme Court
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:HR:VSRH:2017:918
    • Bank of Greece - CITIBANK INTERNATIONAL P.L.C
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      National Court/Tribunal
      Deciding body:
      Council of State
      Type:
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
    • Public Prosecutor v accused
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      National Court/Tribunal
      Deciding body:
      Supreme Court
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Agriculture
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:NL:HR:2017:241
    • A and B v. Norway
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      European Court of Human Rights
      Deciding body:
      Court (Grand Chamber)
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1115JUD002413011
    • JZ v. Prokuratura Rejonowa Łódź Śródmieście
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      Court of Justice of the European Union
      Deciding body:
      Advocate General
      Type:
      Opinion
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:EU:C:2016:574
    • Criminal Proceedings against Piotr Kossowski
      Decision date:
      Deciding body type:
      Court of Justice of the European Union
      Deciding body:
      Court (Grand Chamber)
      Type:
      Decision
      Policy area:
      Justice, freedom and security
      ECLI (European case law identifier):
      ECLI:EU:C:2016:483

    0 results found

    0 results found

    0 results found

    • 1
      August
      2024
      Migrant workers are particularly at risk of labour exploitation. Workplace inspectors play a role in protecting non-EU workers' rights. This report guides inspectors to identify abuse and protect migrant workers. In autumn 2024, FRA will publish a manual with extensive resources to support workplace inspectors.
    • 10
      June
      2024
      Data protection rules protect privacy and prevent personal information from misuse. When the general data protection regulation (GDPR) came into force in 2018, it strengthened the role of data protection authorities. These supervisory bodies are the key enforcers of the fundamental right of protection of personal data. This report analyses the challenges they face in the GDPR implementation. The findings complement the European Commission's forthcoming evaluation of the GDPR.
    • 6
      February
      2024
      Since the publication of its 2020 report 'Strong and effective national human rights institutions – challenges, promising practices and opportunities', the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) has been regularly tracking the accreditation status and the mandates of the NHRIs. This December 2023 Update develops the annual update further and covers not only the accreditation status and the mandates, but also additional aspects, namely the role of NHRIs in the context of EU funds and the use of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
    • FRA,2024 / J.M. Image Factory/Adobe Stock
      Report / Paper / Summary
      2024
      Tackling greenwashing is an issue where human rights, consumer rights and climate goals align. Companies use greenwashing to convince people to buy products that are not always as environmentally friendly as they claim to be. They mislead consumers and harm the environment. This report shows how a human rights approach can combat greenwashing. It is based on consultations with experts in 10 Member States. The report identifies gaps in existing laws and enforcement. It includes case studies of consumers seeking remedies for misleading environmental claims.
      The EU and Member States should enforce rules that make it harder for companies to make misleading environmental claims. They should strengthen rules that make it easier for consumers to prove that companies are greenwashing. Consumer and environmental organisations already hold governments and business to account. Governments should make it easier to use collective action for the protection of consumer rights and the environment.
    • 19
      December
      2023
      All EU funds must be spent in a way that respect fundamental rights. The EU spends billions of euros on creating jobs, economic growth, sustainable development and improving people’s lives. To prevent funds from being spent in ways that directly violate people’s fundamental rights, the EU strengthened the conditions how funds can be spent in 2021. This report looks at how the newly introduced conditions related to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities can be upheld in practice. It analyses the potential role of national human rights institutions, ombudsperson institutions and equality bodies. These safeguards can advance compliance with fundamental rights.
    • 12
      December
      2023
      People fleeing from Ukraine received protection in EU law under the Temporary Protection Directive. Local authorities took the lead in ensuring access to fundamental rights under temporary protection. This report explores the measures to ensure access to housing, education, employment and healthcare in 26 cities and regional authorities across 12 EU Member States. Unprecedented coordination helped overcome challenges, but many uncertainties remain and long-term solutions may be needed. Based on the information collected, this report identifies 12 priority actions, building on FRA’s previous reports concerning people displaced from Ukraine.
    • 8
      December
      2023
      Artificial intelligence is everywhere and affects everyone – from deciding what content people see on their social media feeds to determining who will receive state benefits. AI technologies are typically based on algorithms that make predictions to support or even fully automate decision-making.
    • 22
      November
      2023
      FRA publishes annual updates on the forced return monitoring systems that EU Member States have set up under Article 8 (6) of the EU’s Return Directive (2008/115/EC). This latest update covers the period until the end of 2022.
    • Report / Paper / Summary
      31
      October
      2023
      Fundamental rights are an important consideration in European border management. Virtually all activities can have an impact on rights – from risk analysis to training, border checks and border surveillance. Safeguards in laws regulating European border management aim to protect rights. This report is a contribution to the first review of the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 that offers an opportunity to reflect on how best to improve the fundamental rights situation at the external borders of the EU.
    • 25
      October
      2023
      FRA's first Being Black in the EU report exposed widespread and entrenched racism against people of African descent in Europe. Now updated with new data, this report revisits the situation revealing persistent racial discrimination, harassment and violence. Overall, experiences of racial discrimination increased in the EU countries since 2016, reaching as high as 77%. The lack of progress is alarming despite binding anti-discrimination law in the EU since 2000 and significant EU policy developments since then.