Scholarly record
EUROPEAN PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE AND THE PRINCIPAL-AGENT PARADIGM. SUPRANATIONAL ORGANIZATION OR DELEGATED INSTITUTION?
Abstract
The European Public Prosecutor's Office, a revolutionary novelty, has raised many issues and questions from the initial moment of the proposal of its creation in 2013 until now. Being a rather controversial topic, both among practitioners and theorists, the European Public Prosecutor's Office presents itself as an "unidentified flying object" among the European or national institutions of the EU Member States regarding the nature of this body, the way it works, the way of influencing the political decision and its competence, the corresponding policy, and the guiding governance, etc. Preventing and combating, investigating, and prosecuting crimes affecting the EU's financial interests is the core task of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. However, as we will see in this paper, the dynamics of globalization and the criminal phenomenon seem to hinder the proper functioning of this new body, the complexity of these crimes and causal links with phenomena such as terrorism, organized crime or trafficking of prohibited substances can influence the European Public Prosecutor's Office`s investigation and prosecution activities. This paper analyzes from an institutionalist perspective the emergence, evolution, and functioning, but especially the future perspective of this newly established body. Conceptually, the added value of the paper will be the political-legal analysis of how the European Public Prosecutor's Office was created, but also how it can actually work in relation to the national authorities and national law systems of the 27 Member States. Last but not least, this analysis wants to position the European Public Prosecutor's Office, together with other European bodies, agencies, and institutions, as a pillar in the European Union's path toward a possible future federalist scenario.
Publication Impact Profile
Publication details
References20
Joshua Goldstein, Jon Pevehouse, International relations, Polirom, Ia?i, 2008, pp 498- 500;
National Defense Strategy of Romania for the period 2020-2024, pp. 25-26;
John Vervalle, The material scope of competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office: A harmonised national patchwork?, ERA Forum journal of the academy of European Law, no. 2, 2014, pp 10-12;
Constan?a Matu?escu, The jurisdictional subsidiarity at the European Union level and its implications in the internal legal order, Curierul Judiciar, Bucharest, 2018, pp. 5-6;
Oana-Mariuca Petrescu, The European Public Prosecutor’s Office: A theoretical analyze of the proposed regulation for establishment of a European Public Prosecutor’s Office, Challenges of the Knowledge Society, Volume 4, no. 1, 2014, p 835;
Arthur Stein, Neoliberal institutionalism, The Oxford Handbook for international relations, New York, 2008, pp 202-203;
Guy Peters, Institutional theory in the political science. The new institutionalism, Pinter, London, 1999, pp 2-7;
Robert Keohane, Lisa Martin, The promise of institutionalist theory, International Security Review, vol. 20, no. 1, Cambridge, 1995, pp 40;
Christer Jonsson, Ole Elgstrom, European Union negociation. Process, networks and institutions, Routledge, London, 2005;
Douglas Cecil North, Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1990, pp 3;
Vivien Lowndes, Mark Roberts, Why institutions matter: the new institutionalism in political science, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire, 2013, pp 6-8;
Andre Sorensen, New Institutionalism and planning theory – final version, Routledge, Toronto, 2017, pp 2-5;
Douglass North, Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1990, p 4;
Vivien Schmidt, Institutionalism, The Encyclopedia of political thought, Boston, 2014, pp 2-5;
Andre Sorensen, New Institutionalism and planning theory – final version, pp 3-7;
Tom Delereux, Johan Adriaensen, Principal-agent analysis, and the European Union, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019, pp 1-3;
Mark Pollack, Principal-agent analysis and international delegation: red herrings, theoretical clarifications, and empirical disputes, European political and administrative studies, no 2, Brugge, 2007, pp 11-14;
Douglas Cecil North, Institutions, institutional change and economic performance, p 3;
Tom Delereux, Johan Adriaensen, Principal-agent analysis, and the European Union, pp 5-6;
Mark Pollack, International relations theory and European integration, European University Institute Badia Fiesolana, Italy, 2000, pp 6-9;
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.

