European Public Prosecutor's Office: Difference between revisions

European Public Prosecutor's Office
	; EPPO headquarters in Luxembourg City.
Body overview
Formed	2017
Jurisdiction	European Union
Headquarters	Kirchberg, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg
Body executive	Laura Codruța Kövesi, European Chief Prosecutor;
Website	www.eppo.europa.eu

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 00:31, 1 December 2024

The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) is an independent body of the European Union (EU) with a juridical personality, established under the Treaty of Lisbon between 24 of the 27 states of the EU following the method of enhanced cooperation.^[1]^[2] The EPPO was established as a response to the need for a prosecutorial body to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union (EU).^[3] The idea of establishing the EPPO gained momentum with a legislative proposal put forth by the European Commission in 2013.^[4] After lengthy negotiations and discussions within the European Council, the European Parliament, and Member States, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 was adopted on October 12, 2017, formalizing the creation of the EPPO.^[4] The EPPO Regulation is the EPPO's legal basis, as it outlines the objectives, structure, jurisdiction, and operational procedures.^[5] Directive (EU) 2017/1371, also known as the PIF Directive, specifies the criminal offences affecting the EU's financial interest falling under the EPPO's jurisdiction.^[6] The EPPO's primary mandate is to investigate and prosecute offences such as fraud, corruption, and money laundering that harm the financial interests of the EU, as defined by the PIF Directive.^[7] The EPPO represents a significant step towards a more integrated and effective approach to combating transnational crimes within the EU, fostering collaboration and coordination among member states to protect the Union's financial resources.^[8] As an independent EU body, the EPPO plays a crucial role in ensuring the rule of law and safeguarding the integrity of the EU's financial system.^[9] The EPPO is based in Kirchberg, Luxembourg City alongside the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Auditors (ECA).^[10]^[11]

History

Early proposals

It was strongly backed by the former Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security, Franco Frattini as part of plans to strengthen the Eurojust agency. Frattini stated in August 2007 that he is "convinced that Europe will have its general prosecutor in the future" and suggested that the commission was just waiting for the treaty to come into force. He stated that a prosecutor "could prove useful" in areas "where important European interests are at stake", namely in dealing with financial crime, fraud, and counterfeiting at the European level.^[13]

The signing, in late 2007, of the Lisbon Treaty by all Member States of the European Union, which refers explicitly to the idea of creating a European Public Prosecutor's Office to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union and, where appropriate, to combat serious crime with a cross-border dimension, resulted in the conclusion of an International Seminar in Madrid to study the new institution and the possibilities of its implementation. The seminar was called by the Spanish Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido and was led by Prosecutors Jorge Espina and Isabel Vicente Carbajosa. The presentations, discussions, and conclusions of the meeting were collected in a book, The future European Public Prosecutor's Office, in English and Spanish, and have served to date to guide the proposals and jobs that have been carried out in the implementation of this institution.^[14]

Following the short selling of certain euro-zone financial products in 2009 and 2010, Spain proposed that the EU enact the European Public Prosecutor's Office provision so the post could coordinate legal action in retaliation. "Spain wants the European Union to use a planned public prosecutor's office for the region to protect the euro currency against speculators", Spanish attorney general Cándido Conde-Pumpido said in March 2010.^[15]

In March 2010 Eurojust cited the European Public Prosecutor's Office as a potential solution to the problem of cross-border crime in the EU. Despite opposition from some member states seeing it as impinging on their sovereignty (partly due to the necessary harmonisation of legal codes), Eurojust set up a working group to study the idea.^[16]

Spanish Presidency draft for the implementation of the EPPO

In March 2010, during the Spanish Presidency, the Spanish Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido officially launched a draft for the implementation of the European Prosecutor, under the provision of Article 86 of the Treaty of Lisbon. Conde-Pumpido, speaking with the President of the Commission of Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, and the Spanish Secretary of State for the European Union (SEUE), Diego Lopez Garrido, presented a technical project, developed from the conclusions of the International Conference convened by the Spanish Prosecutor in 2008 and 2009, which would be discussed later in the Luxembourg Council.

The creation of this institution was subsequently discussed, according to the Spanish proposal, by the meeting of Ministers for Justice and Home Affairs held in Luxembourg on 27 April 2010, but its implementation was suspended until a new discussion in 2013.^[17]

Seminar of the Belgian Presidency and Eurojust in Bruges

On 21 and 22 September 2010, Eurojust, in co-operation with the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, held a strategic seminar, "Eurojust and the Lisbon Treaty: towards more effective action", "Establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust?", at the College of Europe in Bruges, Belgium.

The goals of the seminar were the development of Eurojust in light of the Lisbon Treaty and the possible establishment of a European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust under Article 86 TFEU.^[18]

Barroso Commission proposals

The European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said on 12 September 2012 in his speech to the European Parliament on the state of the Union, that the next presentation of a proposal for the creation of a European Public Prosecutor would come soon, based on "commitment to uphold the rule of law".

On 17 July 2013 the European Commission, at the initiative of Vice-president Viviane Reding and Commissioner Algirdas Semeta, proposed a regulation for the establishment of a, European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO).^[19]^[20]

The proposal was then discussed by the representatives of the EU Member States' experts under the specific procedure set by Article 86 of the Treaty. The following 3 main options were considered within the range of options concerning the scope of the initiative to tackle offences against PIF (protection of financial interests):

Doing nothing – criminal investigations of PIF offences are (still) conducted by Member State authorities exclusively;
Setting-up the EPPO with a limited mandate (PIF offenses) – EPPO has priority competence to order investigations and direct prosecutions into PIF offences
Setting up the EPPO with an extended mandate (PIF offences and serious cross-border crimes) – EPPO has exclusive/shared competence to order investigations and direct prosecutions into PIF offences and other serious cross-border crimes (money laundering, corruption, accounting offences).

Besides these three options regarding scope, the Commission needed to consider a series of significant legal, institutional, and organisational matters (relationship with Eurojust, OLAF, member state authorities, judicial review) which could be formulated as sub-options. Moreover, particular procedural issues (EP involvement, legislative process, what if unanimity requirements are not met, enhanced cooperation with which member states, etc.) needed to be considered in these options. In accordance with Article 86, the proposal could include one or more regulations covering different aspects of the setting up of an EPPO. Soft law instruments were not relevant as legislative measures were needed to address criminal offences and law enforcement.

Likely impacts will include a more effective, dissuasive, and equivalent criminal law protection of the Union's financial interests. Irregularities affecting the European budget may reach or exceed €1 billion per year, from which around €280 million could be suspected EU fraud cases to be investigated within the EPPO's competence. This amount could be significantly reduced if the EPPO were to direct investigations and prosecutions throughout the EU, acting on all cases of PIF offences. Moreover, economies of scale might be achieved for the benefit of justice budgets of participating Member States, due to a streamlining of the judicial procedures involving EU financial interests across the EU.

Depending on how the relationship between the EPPO and the national authorities would be defined, the impact would be primarily on national police and judicial authorities, which would certainly have to cope with the new framework for investigations and prosecutions ordered by the EPPO. The administrative burden would depend on the new relations established between the EPPO and the national authorities, and whether the initiative would impose new information obligations on Member States.

Preparatory work, in particular the 2001 Green paper on the establishment of a European Prosecutor, was taken into consideration. Existing studies and evaluations, in particular the Criminal Justice Systems Study, the Euroneeds Study, the Pretrial investigative model rules, the Spanish Presidency Report, officially launched in Brussels in March 2010, etc., and studies regarding Eurojust, provided valuable input.

National and European Parliaments

In November 2013 the Commission concluded that the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor's Office complied "with the principle of subsidiarity" in a report addressing the issue after it was raised by 14 national parliamentary chambers in 11 Member States.^[21] The European Parliament subsequently voted in favour of the commission's proposal to set up the body.^[22] On 23 September 2019, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union agreed to appoint Laura Codruța Kövesi as European Chief Prosecutor.^[23]

Role and structure

The role of the EPPO is to investigate and prosecute fraud against the budget of the European Union and other crimes against the EU's financial interests including fraud concerning EU funds of over €10,000 and cross-border VAT fraud cases involving damages above €10 million. Previously, only state authorities could investigate and prosecute these crimes and could not act beyond their borders. OLAF, Eurojust, and Europol could not similarly act. The body is intended to be decentralised, based around European Delegated Prosecutors located in each participating Member State. The central office consists of a European Chief Prosecutor supported by 22 European Prosecutors, as well as technical and investigatory staff. The EPPO may request a suspect's arrest, but this must be confirmed by the relevant state authority.^[24]^[25]

The EPPO has a two-tiered structure and is described as a hybrid set-up.^[26]^[27] The European Chief Prosecutor heads the EPPO, represents it externally, and presides over its college. Two deputies assist the chief prosecutor and function as European Chief Prosecutor in the absence of the chief prosecutor.^[28] The determination of the working language of the EPPO is a decision-making matter of the College of the EPPO.^[29] Since 30 September 2020, Art. Paragraph 1 of the EPPO Decision 002/2020 stipulates that English is the working language for operational and administrative activities. According to Art. 1(2) of the same decision, the French language shall be used in conjunction with English in communications with the ECJ.^[30]

During the establishment of the EPPO, an interim director performed the duties under Art. 20 of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. According to Art. 20 para. 1 lit. a of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, an official of the commission was to be appointed as Interim Director after consultation with the council. He was responsible for the interim administrative apparatus and undertook, for example, recruitment (service contracts, etc.), see Art. 20 (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 and the provision of financial liquidity for the initial phase of the EPPO as well as the search for a suitable location in Luxembourg.

The College (Governing Body)

The College of the EPPO consists of the European Chief Prosecutor and one European Prosecutor per participating Member State – two of whom function as Deputies for the European Chief Prosecutor.^[28]^[31]

European Prosecutors

The European Prosecutors are distinct from the European Delegated Prosecutors and the European Chief Prosecutor. The European Prosecutors supervise the European Delegated Prosecutors, who conduct investigations on the ground in the participating Member States.^[32] At the end of July 2020, the first cohort of European Prosecutors was appointed by the Council of the EU.^[33] On 28 September 2020, the European Public Prosecutors were sworn in before the judge responsible at the European Court of Justice.^[34]

The decisions of the college are based on internal decision-making rules (Procedural Rules).^[35]

The Permanent Chambers of the EPPO

The Permanent Chambers of the EPPO each consist of three members. They are two European Prosecutors and, as chairperson, the European Chief Prosecutor or one of their deputies, or a European Prosecutor, cf. Art. 10 of the EPPO Regulation. The Chambers are responsible for controlling the investigations of the European Delegated Prosecutors. The Chambers decide above all on the filing of charges or the discontinuation of proceedings. The right of evocation of Art. 27 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 can also be ordered by the Chamber.

European Delegated Prosecutors (core of the EPPO's investigative work)

Looking at the EPPO's structure hierarchically, the European Delegated Prosecutors are below the Permanent Chambers. The European Delegated Prosecutors carry out their work locally, in their respective member states. In their work, they are independent, i.e. free from instructions by national authorities. At the member state level, the European Delegated Prosecutors are responsible for prosecuting PIF offences (see Brodowski for an overview). According to an internal EPPO agreement, there will be 140 European Delegated Prosecutors across the union.

The table below lists the number of candidates proposed and appointed per country (as of 2 August 2021):


Country	Candidates proposed	Candidates appointed by College of the EPPO	Started working for the EPPO
Austria	2	2	0
Belgium	2	2	1
Bulgaria	10	4	3
Croatia	2	2	2
Cyprus	2	2	0
Czech Republic	5	5	5
Estonia	2	2	2
Finland	1	1	0
France	5	4	4
Germany	11	11	11
Greece	7	5	0
Italy	15	15	15
Latvia	4	4	4
Lithuania	4	3	3
Luxembourg	2	2	0
Malta	2	2	2
Netherlands	2	2	2
Poland
Portugal	4	4	4
Romania	7	7	6
Slovakia	5	5	5
Slovenia	0	0	0
Spain	5	5	6
Sweden

Source: EPPO News "European Delegated Prosecutors Overview per Country"^[36]^[37]

The Finnish Delay

When the EPPO launched its operations on 1 June 2021, Finland and Slovenia had failed to appoint their respective European Delegated Prosecutors. In Finland, the delay was due to a debate between the Finnish government wishing to only appoint part-time prosecutors because of a low expected workload, while European Chief Prosecutor Laura Kövesi insisted all European Delegated Prosecutors were to work on a full-time contract.^[38] A compromise was worked out at the beginning of June 2021^[39] and the college appointed the Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor a month later.^[40]

The Janša Appointment Affair

Shortly before the repeatedly postponed but then set 1 June 2021 starting date of the EPPO, it emerged that Slovenia's acting head of government Janez Janša prevented the selection and nomination of two Slovenian European Delegated Prosecutors. In the wake of this, Slovenia's then Minister for Justice Lilijana Kozlovič resigned from her post on 27 May 2021.^[41] Kozlovič belongs to the smaller ruling party SMC and had asked the independent Prosecutorial Council to appoint two suitable candidates. ORF and other media reported that Janša might have opposed the nomination of the two prosecutors because they had also been involved in investigations against him in the past.^[42] Zdravko Počivalšek, Slovenia's Minister of Economy and head of the coalition party SMC, also intervened in the dispute. Počivalšek considered the appointment of only one European Delegated Prosecutor from Slovenia by Janša – the compromise Didier Reynders, EU Justice Commissioner, had proposed as an interim solution – to be an overstepping of competence by the government, the government to which he belongs. Počivalšek criticised the EU for exerting pressure in the matter of the hasty appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors and pointed out that participation in the EU authority was voluntary.^[42] The European Chief Prosecutor countered and referred to the very long preparation time. She considers the non-appointment or untimely appointment to be a bad omen, so to speak.^[43]

The issue gained prominence as it coincided with Slovenia taking over the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU on 1 July 2021, causing many Members of the European Parliament and even European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to urge Janša to swiftly appoint the Slovenian European Delegated Prosecutors during a parliamentary plenary debate.^[44]

Legislative procedure through enhanced cooperation

The European Commission proposed a regulation on the establishment of a Public Procecutor's Office on 17 July 2013, based on a mandate in the Treaty of Lisbon to set up such an office.^[45]^[46] However, on 7 February 2017, the Council concluded that no consensus existed among the member states on the proposed regulation.^[47] As a result, 17 EU member states (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain) requested on 14 February 2017 that the proposal be referred to the European Council for their consideration.^[48] After no agreement was reached at the European Council on 9 March 2017,^[49] 16 member states (the prior 17 less Austria, Estonia, and Latvia, plus Cyprus and Portugal) notified the European Parliament, the council, and the commission on 3 April 2017 that they would proceed with establishing the EPPO by the use of enhanced cooperation.^[50] This was done under TFEU Article 86, which allows for a simplified enhanced cooperation procedure that does not require authorization from the council to proceed. The participating member states agreed on the legislative text to establish the EPPO on 8 June 2017.^[51] By this point, Latvia and Estonia had begun participating in the enhanced cooperation procedure. The proposal was approved by the European Parliament on 5 October 2017,^[52] and on 12 October 2017, the regulation was given final approval by the 20 participating member states, which had grown to include Austria and Italy.^[53] The EPPO did not have the authority to begin investigating or prosecuting crimes until a decision of the Commission approved this, which per the terms of the Regulation could not take place until 3 years after the entry into force of the Regulation in November 2017.^[53] On 6 May 2021, the commission's decision to launch operations was adopted, with a starting date of 1 June 2021.^[54]

EPPO members

24 EU member states participate in the enhanced cooperation.^[2] The original regulation was joined by 20 member states.^[55] Other member states, apart from Denmark which has an opt-out from the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ), are permitted to join subsequently. (Ireland also has an opt-out from the AFSJ, but the form of its opt-out is more flexible, giving it the ability to opt in on a case-by-case basis.)

Following the Rutte III Cabinet taking office^[56] the Netherlands officially requested to join the EPPO on 14 May 2018.^[57]^[58] Their participation was approved by the commission on 1 August 2018.^[59]^[60] Malta requested to join on 14 June 2018,^[61] and their participation was approved on 7 August 2018.^[62]^[63] Following the Tusk III Cabinet being installed as the government of Poland, it applied to join on 5 January 2024 to the European Commission.^[64] The application was approved on 29 February 2024.^[65]^[66]^[67] On 13 November 2019 Stefan Löfven, Prime Minister of Sweden, declared that joining the EPPO was first among three EU policy objectives for his government.^[68] In March 2024 the Swedish government submitted a bill to parliament containing legislation to enable joining the EPPO,^[69] which was approved on 29 May. On 5 June 2024, the Swedish government notified its request to participate in the EPPO to the Council of Ministers and the EU Commission, which the EU Commission approved on 16 July 2024.^[70]^[71]

Members

Non-participants

Denmark (opt-out)
Hungary
Ireland (opt-out, with ability to opt-in)

Legal basis

The EPPO was provided for in Article 86 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union by the Treaty of Lisbon.^[72]^[73] The article states the following:

Establishment

The Council of the European Union, by a special legislative procedure, may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office besed on Eurojust.
This must be done by unanimity in the council and with the consent of the European Parliament.
If the Council cannot reach unanimity, a group of at least nine member states may refer a draft to the European Council.
Those member states may also proceed to establish enhanced cooperation between themselves after informing Parliament, the council, and the commission.

Role

The office shall, in liaison with Europol, be responsible for investigating, prosecuting and bringing to judgment those connected to offences against the EU's financial interests.
It shall exercise this function in the relevant national courts.
The regulations establishing the office shall determine rules governing how it performs its duties including the admissibility of evidence.
The European Council may amend the treaty, after consulting the commission and gaining the consent of Parliament, to extend its powers to include serious cross-border crime.

List of European Chief Prosecutors

N°	Portrait	Name	Term	Home country
1		Laura Codruța Kövesi	31 October 2019 – Present^[74]	Romania

Prospects for the future

So far, the limited mission of the EPPO is to investigate, prosecute and bring to judgement, before national courts, persons suspected of offences affecting the financial interests of the Union. The so-called 'PIF Directive' sets out what those offences are. However the mission of EPPO may also be extended in the future to cover other serious cross-border crimes. The functions of EPPO are carried out by European delegated prosecutors in the participating member states who have the same powers as national public prosecutors in addition to the powers conferred on them by Union law. For instance, the European delegated prosecutor can issue an EAW or request that a competent national judicial authority issue an EAW.

Budget and enlargement

In light of the acceleration of the disbursement of the EU recovery plan funds as well as the potential upcoming enlargement of EPPO to Poland and Sweden, in February 2024, EPPO formally asked for a €7.8 million increase of its 2024 budget, to reach a total of €79.7 million. ^[75]

References

^ "20 EU nations back plan for EU prosecutor's office". Fox News. 8 June 2017. Archived from the original on 25 January 2020. Retrieved 25 January 2020.
^ ^a ^b "Members | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Retrieved 31 May 2024.
^ "Understanding the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)". Think Tank European Parliament. Retrieved 14 December 2023.
^ ^a ^b "Background". The independent public prosecution office of the EU. European Public Prosecutors Office. Retrieved 14 December 2023.
^ "Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1".
^ "Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (the PIF Directive) [2017] OJ L 198/29".
^ "Article 4, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1".
^ Vecino, Clara (22 November 2023). "The EPPO: Vanguard in the Battle Against Cross-Border Financial Fraud and Pillar of Judicial Europeanisation". Eyes on Europe. Retrieved 14 December 2023.
^ Mitsilegas, Valsamis (2 April 2021). "European prosecution between cooperation and integration: The European Public Prosecutor's Office and the rule of law". Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 28 (2): 254–264. doi:10.1177/1023263X211005933. S2CID 233390442.
^ Brenton, Hannah (9 May 2019). "Europe's first public prosecutor to be housed in Kirchberg tower". luxtimes.lu. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.
^ Tasch, Barbara (8 June 2017). "New European Public Prosecutor's Office to be based in Luxembourg". luxtimes.lu. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.
^ Lina Verschwele (9 June 2022). "Europe's Top Prosecutor Brings In More Money than She Spends". Der Spiegel. Archived from the original on 11 June 2022. Retrieved 11 June 2022.
^ "Brussels eyes single European public prosecutor". EUobserver. 1 August 2007. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
^ "La futura Fiscalía Europea-The Future European Public Prosecutors Office" (PDF). Fiscalía General del Estado. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 April 2018. Retrieved 2 April 2018.
^ "Spain calls for EU prosecutor to protect euro". Reuters. 3 March 2010. Archived from the original on 19 February 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2020.
^ "Europe lacks resources to tackle cross-border crime, says Eurojust". EUobserver. 17 March 2010. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
^ [1] Archived 19 December 2011 at the Wayback Machine España insiste en la Fiscalia Europea. Diario jurídico, 7 de mayo de 2010 (in Spanish)
^ [2] Archived 23 April 2014 at the Wayback Machine Strategic Seminar – Establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust?
^ "Brussels explores creation of 'EU public prosecutor'". EUobserver. 5 June 2012. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
^ "European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Protecting taxpayers' money against fraud: Commission proposes European Public Prosecutor's Office and reinforces OLAF procedural guarantees". europa.eu. Archived from the original on 27 September 2019. Retrieved 27 September 2019.
^ "'YELLOW CARD' ON EPPO TRIGGERS COMMISSION REVIEW". Vice President of the European Commission. November 2013. Archived from the original on 7 June 2014. Retrieved 3 June 2014.
^ "European Parliament backs European Public Prosecutor's office". out-law.com. 14 March 2014. Archived from the original on 6 June 2014. Retrieved 3 June 2014.
^ "Kövesi to become EU Chief Prosecutor". European Parliament. 23 September 2019. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.
^ "Judicial cooperation". European Commission - European Commission. Archived from the original on 5 October 2019. Retrieved 27 September 2019.
^ Behr, Dr Nicolai (20 June 2017). "European Union introduces European Public Prosecutor's Office to fight crimes against the EU". Archived from the original on 1 July 2017. Retrieved 20 June 2017.
^ "The EPPO's Hybrid Structure and Legal Framework - eucrim". eucrim.eu. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ Auditors, European Court of (5 July 2019). "New kid on the block: the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Medium. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ ^a ^b "European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.consilium.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 1 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ "Oberstaatsanwalt über Betrug mit EU-Geldern - Gute Nachrichten für europäische Steuerzahler". Deutschlandfunk Kultur (in German). Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ EPPO/Kövesi (30 September 2020). "Decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) of 30 September 2020 on Internal Language Arrangements" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 January 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ "Structure and characteristics | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 27 July 2021. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
^ Kuhl, Lothar. "The European Public Prosecutor's Office – More Effective, Equivalent, and Independent Criminal Prosecution against Fraud?". EUCRIM.eu. Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law. Retrieved 4 July 2024.
^ "College of the EU Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)". www.consilium.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 2 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ @euprosecutor (1 October 2020). "WATCH 📹 the moment the European Chief Prosecutor and 22 European prosecutors took their oath of office before @EUCourtPress , a great privilege for the #EPPO. 🇪🇺" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
^ "The EPPO's Structure and Powers—1 European Head, 22 National Swords". Debevoise. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ "European Delegated Prosecutors: an overview per country | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.
^ "Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
^ "Finland strikes staffing deal with new EU prosecutor's office". POLITICO. 4 June 2021. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ EPPO (4 June 2021). "Finnish authorities and the EPPO reach an agreement regarding European Delegated Prosecutors". Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ EPPO (5 July 2021). "Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College". Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ Maček, Sebastijan R. (28 May 2021). "Slovenian justice chief resigns after government annuls EPPO procedure". www.euractiv.com. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ ^a ^b red, ORF at/Agenturen (27 May 2021). "Slowenien: Ministerin in Streit mit Jansa zurückgetreten". news.ORF.at (in German). Archived from the original on 3 June 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ LTO. "Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft startet". Legal Tribune Online (in German). Archived from the original on 13 June 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ "Slovenia's EU presidency off to a rough start". euronews. 6 July 2021. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.
^ Nielsen, Nikolaj (5 June 2012). "Brussels explores creation of 'EU public prosecutor'". EUobserver. Archived from the original on 23 December 2012. Retrieved 30 January 2013.
^ "European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Protecting taxpayers' money against fraud: Commission proposes European Public Prosecutor's Office and reinforces OLAF procedural guarantees". europa.eu. Archived from the original on 12 August 2013. Retrieved 10 August 2013.
^ "European Public Prosecutor's Office : Council takes first step towards a possible enhanced cooperation". Council of the European Union. 7 February 2017. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
^ "Proposal on the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - State of play". Council of the European Union. 7 March 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.^{[permanent dead link‍]}
^ "Conclusions by the President of the European Council". European Council. 9 March 2017. Archived from the original on 26 September 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
^ "European public prosecutor's office : 16 member states together to fight fraud against the EU budget". Council of the European Union. 3 April 2017. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
^ "20 member states agree on details on creating the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - Consilium". www.consilium.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 19 June 2017. Retrieved 11 June 2017.
^ "Procedure file - 2013/0255(APP) - European Public Prosecutor's Office". European Parliament. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
^ ^a ^b "Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office ('the EPPO')". Official Journal of the European Union. L 283/1. 31 October 2017. Archived from the original on 22 January 2018. Retrieved 31 October 2017.
^ "European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO)". European Commission. Archived from the original on 29 September 2018. Retrieved 11 October 2021.
^ "20 member states confirm the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office". Council of the European Union. 12 October 2017. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
^ Jeroen Segenhout (10 October 2017). "Nederland sluit zich aan bij Europees OM" (in Dutch). Archived from the original on 20 September 2020. Retrieved 21 October 2017.
^ "European Public Prosecutor's Office - update on the implementation". Council of the European Union. 30 May 2018. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 12 June 2018.
^ "OUTCOME OF THE COUNCIL MEETING - 3622nd Council meeting - Justice and Home Affairs" (PDF). Council of the European Union. 5 June 2018. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 June 2018. Retrieved 9 June 2018.
^ "European Public Prosecutor's Office: The Netherlands becomes 21st country to join common efforts to protect EU budget against fraud". European Commission. 1 August 2018. Archived from the original on 2 August 2018. Retrieved 2 August 2018.
^ "COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1094 of 1 August 2018 confirming the participation of the Netherlands in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Archived from the original on 28 June 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
^ "PRESS RELEASE BY THE MINISTRY FOR JUSTICE, CULTURE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Malta joins the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Government of Malta. 14 June 2018. Archived from the original on 16 June 2018. Retrieved 15 June 2018.
^ "European Commission - Daily News". European Commission. 7 August 2018. Archived from the original on 7 August 2018. Retrieved 8 August 2018.
^ "COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1103 of 7 August 2018 confirming the participation of Malta in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Official Journal of the European Union. 7 August 2018. Archived from the original on 9 August 2018. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
^ "Justice minister signs Poland's bid to join EPPO". TVN24. 5 January 2024. Retrieved 3 February 2024.
^ "Polska częścią Prokuratury Europejskiej - Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości - Portal Gov.pl". Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości (in Polish). Retrieved 29 February 2024.
^ "Poland's efforts to restore rule of law pave the way for accessing up to €137 billion in EU funds". European Commission. 29 February 2024. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ "COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2024/807 of 29 February 2024 confirming the participation of Poland in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Official Journal of the European Union. L 807. 29 February 2024. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ "Speech from Prime Minister's Office". Government of Sweden. 13 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 November 2019. Retrieved 30 January 2020.
^ "The government submits a bill on Swedish participation in the European Public Prosecutor's Office (Eppo)". Government of Sweden. 13 March 2024. Retrieved 16 March 2024.
^ "Daily News 16 / 07 / 2024". European Commission - European Commission. Retrieved 16 July 2024.
^ "Commission Decision (EU) 2024/1952 of 16 July 2024 confirming the participation of Sweden in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Official Journal of the European Union. L 1952. 18 July 2024. Retrieved 18 July 2024.
^ "The requested document does not exist. - EUR-Lex". eur-lex.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
^ "eur-lex". Archived from the original on 1 February 2016. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
^ Decision (EU) 2019/1798 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 appointing the European Chief Prosecutor of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Archived 19 February 2023 at the Wayback Machine, adopted 23 October 2019, effective 31 October 2019.
^ "EPPO requests an increase in budget to allow for successful enlargement of EPPO zone". EPPO. 23 February 2024. Retrieved 26 February 2024.

External links

Media related to European Public Prosecutors Office at Wikimedia Commons

European Public Prosecutor's Office

[1] "20 EU nations back plan for EU prosecutor's office". Fox News. 8 June 2017. Archived from the original on 25 January 2020. Retrieved 25 January 2020.

[:1-2] "Members | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Retrieved 31 May 2024.

[3] "Understanding the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)". Think Tank European Parliament. Retrieved 14 December 2023.

[Background-4] "Background". The independent public prosecution office of the EU. European Public Prosecutors Office. Retrieved 14 December 2023.

[5] "Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1".

[6] "Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (the PIF Directive) [2017] OJ L 198/29".

[7] "Article 4, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1".

[8] Vecino, Clara (22 November 2023). "The EPPO: Vanguard in the Battle Against Cross-Border Financial Fraud and Pillar of Judicial Europeanisation". Eyes on Europe. Retrieved 14 December 2023.

[9] Mitsilegas, Valsamis (2 April 2021). "European prosecution between cooperation and integration: The European Public Prosecutor's Office and the rule of law". Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 28 (2): 254–264. doi:10.1177/1023263X211005933. S2CID 233390442.

[10] Brenton, Hannah (9 May 2019). "Europe's first public prosecutor to be housed in Kirchberg tower". luxtimes.lu. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.

[11] Tasch, Barbara (8 June 2017). "New European Public Prosecutor's Office to be based in Luxembourg". luxtimes.lu. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.

[12] Lina Verschwele (9 June 2022). "Europe's Top Prosecutor Brings In More Money than She Spends". Der Spiegel. Archived from the original on 11 June 2022. Retrieved 11 June 2022.

[13] "Brussels eyes single European public prosecutor". EUobserver. 1 August 2007. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.

[14] "La futura Fiscalía Europea-The Future European Public Prosecutors Office" (PDF). Fiscalía General del Estado. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 April 2018. Retrieved 2 April 2018.

[15] "Spain calls for EU prosecutor to protect euro". Reuters. 3 March 2010. Archived from the original on 19 February 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2020.

[16] "Europe lacks resources to tackle cross-border crime, says Eurojust". EUobserver. 17 March 2010. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.

[17] [1] Archived 19 December 2011 at the Wayback Machine España insiste en la Fiscalia Europea. Diario jurídico, 7 de mayo de 2010 (in Spanish)

[18] [2] Archived 23 April 2014 at the Wayback Machine Strategic Seminar – Establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust?

[19] "Brussels explores creation of 'EU public prosecutor'". EUobserver. 5 June 2012. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.

[20] "European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Protecting taxpayers' money against fraud: Commission proposes European Public Prosecutor's Office and reinforces OLAF procedural guarantees". europa.eu. Archived from the original on 27 September 2019. Retrieved 27 September 2019.

[EPP_Commission_Review-21] "'YELLOW CARD' ON EPPO TRIGGERS COMMISSION REVIEW". Vice President of the European Commission. November 2013. Archived from the original on 7 June 2014. Retrieved 3 June 2014.

[European_Parliament_backs_European_Public_Prosecutors_Office-22] "European Parliament backs European Public Prosecutor's office". out-law.com. 14 March 2014. Archived from the original on 6 June 2014. Retrieved 3 June 2014.

[Kövesi_to_become_EU_Chief_Prosecutor-23] "Kövesi to become EU Chief Prosecutor". European Parliament. 23 September 2019. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2019.

[24] "Judicial cooperation". European Commission - European Commission. Archived from the original on 5 October 2019. Retrieved 27 September 2019.

[25] Behr, Dr Nicolai (20 June 2017). "European Union introduces European Public Prosecutor's Office to fight crimes against the EU". Archived from the original on 1 July 2017. Retrieved 20 June 2017.

[26] "The EPPO's Hybrid Structure and Legal Framework - eucrim". eucrim.eu. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[Auditors-27] Auditors, European Court of (5 July 2019). "New kid on the block: the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Medium. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[consilium.europa.eu-28] "European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.consilium.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 1 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[29] "Oberstaatsanwalt über Betrug mit EU-Geldern - Gute Nachrichten für europäische Steuerzahler". Deutschlandfunk Kultur (in German). Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[30] EPPO/Kövesi (30 September 2020). "Decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) of 30 September 2020 on Internal Language Arrangements" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 January 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[31] "Structure and characteristics | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 27 July 2021. Retrieved 2 August 2021.

[32] Kuhl, Lothar. "The European Public Prosecutor's Office – More Effective, Equivalent, and Independent Criminal Prosecution against Fraud?". EUCRIM.eu. Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law. Retrieved 4 July 2024.

[33] "College of the EU Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)". www.consilium.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 2 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[34] @euprosecutor (1 October 2020). "WATCH 📹 the moment the European Chief Prosecutor and 22 European prosecutors took their oath of office before @EUCourtPress , a great privilege for the #EPPO. 🇪🇺" (Tweet) – via Twitter.

[35] "The EPPO's Structure and Powers—1 European Head, 22 National Swords". Debevoise. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[36] "European Delegated Prosecutors: an overview per country | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 8 July 2021.

[37] "Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College | European Public Prosecutor's Office". www.eppo.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 2 August 2021.

[38] "Finland strikes staffing deal with new EU prosecutor's office". POLITICO. 4 June 2021. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[39] EPPO (4 June 2021). "Finnish authorities and the EPPO reach an agreement regarding European Delegated Prosecutors". Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[40] EPPO (5 July 2021). "Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College". Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[41] Maček, Sebastijan R. (28 May 2021). "Slovenian justice chief resigns after government annuls EPPO procedure". www.euractiv.com. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[:0-42] red, ORF at/Agenturen (27 May 2021). "Slowenien: Ministerin in Streit mit Jansa zurückgetreten". news.ORF.at (in German). Archived from the original on 3 June 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[43] LTO. "Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft startet". Legal Tribune Online (in German). Archived from the original on 13 June 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[44] "Slovenia's EU presidency off to a rough start". euronews. 6 July 2021. Archived from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2021.

[45] Nielsen, Nikolaj (5 June 2012). "Brussels explores creation of 'EU public prosecutor'". EUobserver. Archived from the original on 23 December 2012. Retrieved 30 January 2013.

[46] "European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Protecting taxpayers' money against fraud: Commission proposes European Public Prosecutor's Office and reinforces OLAF procedural guarantees". europa.eu. Archived from the original on 12 August 2013. Retrieved 10 August 2013.

[47] "European Public Prosecutor's Office : Council takes first step towards a possible enhanced cooperation". Council of the European Union. 7 February 2017. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.

[48] "Proposal on the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - State of play". Council of the European Union. 7 March 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.^{[permanent dead link‍]}

[49] "Conclusions by the President of the European Council". European Council. 9 March 2017. Archived from the original on 26 September 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.

[50] "European public prosecutor's office : 16 member states together to fight fraud against the EU budget". Council of the European Union. 3 April 2017. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.

[51] "20 member states agree on details on creating the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - Consilium". www.consilium.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 19 June 2017. Retrieved 11 June 2017.

[52] "Procedure file - 2013/0255(APP) - European Public Prosecutor's Office". European Parliament. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.

[reg-53] "Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office ('the EPPO')". Official Journal of the European Union. L 283/1. 31 October 2017. Archived from the original on 22 January 2018. Retrieved 31 October 2017.

[54] "European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO)". European Commission. Archived from the original on 29 September 2018. Retrieved 11 October 2021.

[confirm-55] "20 member states confirm the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office". Council of the European Union. 12 October 2017. Archived from the original on 21 October 2017. Retrieved 21 October 2017.

[56] Jeroen Segenhout (10 October 2017). "Nederland sluit zich aan bij Europees OM" (in Dutch). Archived from the original on 20 September 2020. Retrieved 21 October 2017.

[57] "European Public Prosecutor's Office - update on the implementation". Council of the European Union. 30 May 2018. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 12 June 2018.

[58] "OUTCOME OF THE COUNCIL MEETING - 3622nd Council meeting - Justice and Home Affairs" (PDF). Council of the European Union. 5 June 2018. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 June 2018. Retrieved 9 June 2018.

[59] "European Public Prosecutor's Office: The Netherlands becomes 21st country to join common efforts to protect EU budget against fraud". European Commission. 1 August 2018. Archived from the original on 2 August 2018. Retrieved 2 August 2018.

[60] "COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1094 of 1 August 2018 confirming the participation of the Netherlands in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Archived from the original on 28 June 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.

[61] "PRESS RELEASE BY THE MINISTRY FOR JUSTICE, CULTURE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Malta joins the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Government of Malta. 14 June 2018. Archived from the original on 16 June 2018. Retrieved 15 June 2018.

[62] "European Commission - Daily News". European Commission. 7 August 2018. Archived from the original on 7 August 2018. Retrieved 8 August 2018.

[63] "COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1103 of 7 August 2018 confirming the participation of Malta in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Official Journal of the European Union. 7 August 2018. Archived from the original on 9 August 2018. Retrieved 7 August 2018.

[64] "Justice minister signs Poland's bid to join EPPO". TVN24. 5 January 2024. Retrieved 3 February 2024.

[65] "Polska częścią Prokuratury Europejskiej - Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości - Portal Gov.pl". Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości (in Polish). Retrieved 29 February 2024.

[66] "Poland's efforts to restore rule of law pave the way for accessing up to €137 billion in EU funds". European Commission. 29 February 2024. Retrieved 3 March 2024.

[67] "COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2024/807 of 29 February 2024 confirming the participation of Poland in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Official Journal of the European Union. L 807. 29 February 2024. Retrieved 3 March 2024.

[68] "Speech from Prime Minister's Office". Government of Sweden. 13 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 November 2019. Retrieved 30 January 2020.

[69] "The government submits a bill on Swedish participation in the European Public Prosecutor's Office (Eppo)". Government of Sweden. 13 March 2024. Retrieved 16 March 2024.

[70] "Daily News 16 / 07 / 2024". European Commission - European Commission. Retrieved 16 July 2024.

[71] "Commission Decision (EU) 2024/1952 of 16 July 2024 confirming the participation of Sweden in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office". Official Journal of the European Union. L 1952. 18 July 2024. Retrieved 18 July 2024.

[72] "The requested document does not exist. - EUR-Lex". eur-lex.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 16 December 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.

[73] "eur-lex". Archived from the original on 1 February 2016. Retrieved 16 December 2022.

[74] Decision (EU) 2019/1798 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 appointing the European Chief Prosecutor of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office Archived 19 February 2023 at the Wayback Machine, adopted 23 October 2019, effective 31 October 2019.

[75] "EPPO requests an increase in budget to allow for successful enlargement of EPPO zone". EPPO. 23 February 2024. Retrieved 26 February 2024.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 | nativename_r =
 | type = Body
-| logo =
+| logo = EPPO-logo.svg
 | logo_width =
 | logo_caption =
+| image = European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO).jpg
-| seal = EPPO-logo.svg
+| image_caption = EPPO headquarters in Luxembourg City.
+| seal =
 | seal_width =
 | seal_caption =
@@ Line 53: / Line 55: @@
 | footnotes =
 }}
-The '''European Public Prosecutor's Office''' ('''EPPO''') is an [[Agencies, independent bodies and joint undertakings of the European Union and the Euratom|independent body of the European Union]] (EU) with [[juridical person]]ality, established under the [[Treaty of Lisbon]] between 22 of the 27 states of the EU following the method of [[enhanced cooperation]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.foxnews.com/world/20-eu-nations-back-plan-for-eu-prosecutors-office.amp|title=20 EU nations back plan for EU prosecutor's office|publisher=[[Fox News]]|date=8 June 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200125093003/https://www.foxnews.com/world/20-eu-nations-back-plan-for-eu-prosecutors-office.amp|archive-date=25 January 2020|access-date=25 January 2020}}</ref> The EPPO was established as a response to the need for a prosecutorial body to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union (EU).<ref>{{cite web |title=Understanding the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) |url=https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2023)757558 |website=Think Tank European Parliament |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref> The idea of establishing the EPPO gained momentum with a legislative proposal put forth by the European Commission in 2013.<ref name="Background">{{cite web |title=Background |url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/background |website=The independent public prosecution office of the EU |publisher=European Public Prosecutors Office |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref> After lengthy negotiations and discussions within the European Council, the European Parliament and Member States, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 was adopted on October 12, 2017, formalizing the creation of the EPPO.<ref name="Background"/> The EPPO Regulation is the EPPO's legal basis, as it outlines the objectives, structure, jurisdiction, and operational procedures.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1}}</ref> Directive (EU) 2017/1371, also known as the [[PIF Directive]], specifies the criminal offenses affecting the EU's financial interest falling under the EPPO's jurisdiction.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (the PIF Directive) [2017] OJ L 198/29}}</ref> The EPPO's primary mandate is to investigate and prosecute offenses such as fraud, corruption, and money laundering that harm the financial interests of the EU, as defined by the PIF Directive.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Article 4, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1}}</ref> The EPPO represents a significant step towards a more integrated and effective approach to combating transnational crimes within the EU, fostering collaboration and coordination among member states to protect the Union's financial resources.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Vecino |first1=Clara |title=The EPPO: Vanguard in the Battle Against Cross-Border Financial Fraud and Pillar of Judicial Europeanisation |url=https://www.eyes-on-europe.eu/the-eppo-vanguard-in-the-battle-against-cross-border-financial-fraud-and-pillar-of-judicial-europeanisation/ |website=Eyes on Europe |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref> As an independent EU body, the EPPO plays a crucial role in ensuring the rule of law and safeguarding the integrity of the EU's financial system.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mitsilegas |first1=Valsamis |title='European prosecution between cooperation and integration: The European Public Prosecutor's Office and the rule of law |journal=Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law |date=2 April 2021 |volume=28 |issue=2 |pages=254–264 |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1023263X211005933 |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref>
+The '''European Public Prosecutor's Office''' ('''EPPO''') is an [[Agencies, independent bodies and joint undertakings of the European Union and the Euratom|independent body of the European Union]] (EU) with a [[juridical person]]ality, established under the [[Treaty of Lisbon]] between 24 of the 27 states of the EU following the method of [[enhanced cooperation]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.foxnews.com/world/20-eu-nations-back-plan-for-eu-prosecutors-office.amp|title=20 EU nations back plan for EU prosecutor's office|publisher=[[Fox News]]|date=8 June 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200125093003/https://www.foxnews.com/world/20-eu-nations-back-plan-for-eu-prosecutors-office.amp|archive-date=25 January 2020|access-date=25 January 2020}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Members {{!}} European Public Prosecutor's Office |url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/about/members |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=www.eppo.europa.eu}}</ref> The EPPO was established as a response to the need for a prosecutorial body to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union (EU).<ref>{{cite web |title=Understanding the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) |url=https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2023)757558 |website=Think Tank European Parliament |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref> The idea of establishing the EPPO gained momentum with a legislative proposal put forth by the European Commission in 2013.<ref name="Background">{{cite web |title=Background |url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/background |website=The independent public prosecution office of the EU |publisher=European Public Prosecutors Office |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref> After lengthy negotiations and discussions within the European Council, the European Parliament, and Member States, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 was adopted on October 12, 2017, formalizing the creation of the EPPO.<ref name="Background"/> The EPPO Regulation is the EPPO's legal basis, as it outlines the objectives, structure, jurisdiction, and operational procedures.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj |title=Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1}}</ref> Directive (EU) 2017/1371, also known as the [[PIF Directive]], specifies the criminal offences affecting the EU's financial interest falling under the EPPO's jurisdiction.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017L1371| title=Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (the PIF Directive) [2017] OJ L 198/29}}</ref> The EPPO's primary mandate is to investigate and prosecute offences such as fraud, corruption, and money laundering that harm the financial interests of the EU, as defined by the PIF Directive.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj|title=Article 4, Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 October 2017 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO Regulation) [2017] OJ L 283/1}}</ref> The EPPO represents a significant step towards a more integrated and effective approach to combating transnational crimes within the EU, fostering collaboration and coordination among member states to protect the Union's financial resources.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Vecino |first1=Clara |title=The EPPO: Vanguard in the Battle Against Cross-Border Financial Fraud and Pillar of Judicial Europeanisation |url=https://www.eyes-on-europe.eu/the-eppo-vanguard-in-the-battle-against-cross-border-financial-fraud-and-pillar-of-judicial-europeanisation/ |website=Eyes on Europe |date=22 November 2023 |access-date=14 December 2023}}</ref> As an independent EU body, the EPPO plays a crucial role in ensuring the rule of law and safeguarding the integrity of the EU's financial system.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mitsilegas |first1=Valsamis |title=European prosecution between cooperation and integration: The European Public Prosecutor's Office and the rule of law |journal=Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law |date=2 April 2021 |volume=28 |issue=2 |pages=254–264 |doi=10.1177/1023263X211005933 |s2cid=233390442 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
 The EPPO is based in [[Kirchberg, Luxembourg|Kirchberg]], [[Luxembourg City]] alongside the [[Court of Justice of the European Union]] (CJEU) and the [[European Court of Auditors]] (ECA).<ref>{{cite news |last1=Brenton |first1=Hannah |title=Europe's first public prosecutor to be housed in Kirchberg tower |url=https://luxtimes.lu/european-union/37268-europe-s-first-public-prosecutor-to-be-housed-in-kirchberg-tower |access-date=25 September 2019 |work=luxtimes.lu |date=9 May 2019 |language=en |archive-date=25 September 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190925133200/https://luxtimes.lu/european-union/37268-europe-s-first-public-prosecutor-to-be-housed-in-kirchberg-tower |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Tasch |first1=Barbara |title=New European Public Prosecutor's Office to be based in Luxembourg |url=https://luxtimes.lu/archives/2091-new-european-public-prosecutor-s-office-to-be-based-in-luxembourg |access-date=25 September 2019 |work=luxtimes.lu |date=8 June 2017 |language=en |archive-date=25 September 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190925133158/https://luxtimes.lu/archives/2091-new-european-public-prosecutor-s-office-to-be-based-in-luxembourg |url-status=live }}</ref>
 {{Politics of the European Union}}
 ==History==
+[[File:LUX Luxembourg Kirchberg 001 2016.jpg|thumb|The EPPO is located in Tower B of the {{lang|fr|Porte de l'Europe}} complex in [[Luxembourg]], designed by [[Ricardo Bofill Taller de Arquitectura]] (right, with the twin towers of the [[Court of Justice of the European Union]] to the left)<ref>{{cite web |website=Der Spiegel |title=Europe's Top Prosecutor Brings In More Money than She Spends |author=Lina Verschwele |date={{date|2022/06/09}} |url=https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/europe-s-top-prosecutor-brings-in-more-money-than-she-spends-a-ce2edb60-53a7-42ce-9b13-5dc78ec6aa76 |access-date=11 June 2022 |archive-date=11 June 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220611230730/https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/europe-s-top-prosecutor-brings-in-more-money-than-she-spends-a-ce2edb60-53a7-42ce-9b13-5dc78ec6aa76 |url-status=live }}</ref>]]
 ===Early proposals===
-It was strongly backed by the former [[List of European Commission portfolios#Justice, Freedom and Security|Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security]], [[Franco Frattini]] as part of plans to strengthen the Eurojust agency. Frattini stated in August 2007 that he is "convinced that Europe will have its general prosecutor in the future" and suggested that the commission was just waiting for the treaty to come into force. He stated that a prosecutor "could prove useful" in areas "where important European interests are at stake", namely in dealing with financial crime, fraud and counterfeiting at European level.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/24556|title=Brussels eyes single European public prosecutor|date=1 August 2007|website=EUobserver|accessdate=16 December 2022|archive-date=16 December 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221216134645/https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/24556|url-status=live}}</ref>
+It was strongly backed by the former [[List of European Commission portfolios#Justice, Freedom and Security|Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security]], [[Franco Frattini]] as part of plans to strengthen the Eurojust agency. Frattini stated in August 2007 that he is "convinced that Europe will have its general prosecutor in the future" and suggested that the commission was just waiting for the treaty to come into force. He stated that a prosecutor "could prove useful" in areas "where important European interests are at stake", namely in dealing with financial crime, fraud, and counterfeiting at the European level.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/24556|title=Brussels eyes single European public prosecutor|date=1 August 2007|website=EUobserver|accessdate=16 December 2022|archive-date=16 December 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221216134645/https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/24556|url-status=live}}</ref>
-The signing, in late 2007, of the Lisbon Treaty by all Member States of the European Union, which refers explicitly to the idea of creating a European Public Prosecutor's Office to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union and, where appropriate, to combat serious crime with cross-border dimension, resulted in the conclusion of an International Seminar in Madrid to study the new institution and the possibilities of its implementation. The seminar was called by the Spanish Attorney General [[Cándido Conde-Pumpido]], and was led by Prosecutors Jorge Espina and Isabel Vicente Carbajosa. The presentations, discussions and conclusions of the meeting were collected in a book, ''The future European Public Prosecutor's Office'', in English and Spanish, and have served to date to guide the proposals and jobs that have been carried out in the implementation of this institution.<ref>{{cite web|publisher=Fiscalía General del Estado|title=La futura Fiscalía Europea-The Future European Public Prosecutors Office|url=https://www.fiscal.es/fiscal/PA_WebApp_SGNTJ_NFIS/descarga/The_Future_European_Public_Prosecutors_Office.pdf?idFile=a8d5153e-f77c-4c30-92e3-1d084fd80f44|access-date=2 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180403051452/https://www.fiscal.es/fiscal/PA_WebApp_SGNTJ_NFIS/descarga/The_Future_European_Public_Prosecutors_Office.pdf?idFile=a8d5153e-f77c-4c30-92e3-1d084fd80f44|archive-date=3 April 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref>
+The signing, in late 2007, of the Lisbon Treaty by all Member States of the European Union, which refers explicitly to the idea of creating a European Public Prosecutor's Office to combat crimes affecting the financial interests of the Union and, where appropriate, to combat serious crime with a cross-border dimension, resulted in the conclusion of an International Seminar in Madrid to study the new institution and the possibilities of its implementation. The seminar was called by the Spanish Attorney General [[Cándido Conde-Pumpido]] and was led by Prosecutors Jorge Espina and Isabel Vicente Carbajosa. The presentations, discussions, and conclusions of the meeting were collected in a book, ''The future European Public Prosecutor's Office'', in English and Spanish, and have served to date to guide the proposals and jobs that have been carried out in the implementation of this institution.<ref>{{cite web|publisher=Fiscalía General del Estado|title=La futura Fiscalía Europea-The Future European Public Prosecutors Office|url=https://www.fiscal.es/fiscal/PA_WebApp_SGNTJ_NFIS/descarga/The_Future_European_Public_Prosecutors_Office.pdf?idFile=a8d5153e-f77c-4c30-92e3-1d084fd80f44|access-date=2 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180403051452/https://www.fiscal.es/fiscal/PA_WebApp_SGNTJ_NFIS/descarga/The_Future_European_Public_Prosecutors_Office.pdf?idFile=a8d5153e-f77c-4c30-92e3-1d084fd80f44|archive-date=3 April 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref>
-Following the [[short selling]] of certain [[euro-zone]] financial products in 2009 and 2010, Spain proposed the EU enact the European Public Prosecutor's Office provision so the post could co-ordinate legal action in retaliation. "Spain wants the European Union to use a planned public prosecutor's office for the region to protect the euro currency against speculators", Spanish attorney general Cándido Conde-Pumpido said in March 2010.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://in.reuters.com/article/fundsNews/idINLDE6222G620100303?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0 | title=Spain calls for EU prosecutor to protect euro | date=3 March 2010 | publisher=Reuters | access-date=2 May 2020 | archive-date=19 February 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230219040428/https://www.reuters.com/?edition-redirect=in | url-status=live }}</ref>
+Following the [[short selling]] of certain [[euro-zone]] financial products in 2009 and 2010, Spain proposed that the EU enact the European Public Prosecutor's Office provision so the post could coordinate legal action in retaliation. "Spain wants the European Union to use a planned public prosecutor's office for the region to protect the euro currency against speculators", Spanish attorney general Cándido Conde-Pumpido said in March 2010.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://in.reuters.com/article/fundsNews/idINLDE6222G620100303?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0 | title=Spain calls for EU prosecutor to protect euro | date=3 March 2010 | publisher=Reuters | access-date=2 May 2020 | archive-date=19 February 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230219040428/https://www.reuters.com/?edition-redirect=in | url-status=dead }}</ref>
-In March 2010 Eurojust cited the European Public Prosecutor's Office as a potential solution to the problem of cross border crime in the EU. Despite opposition from some member states seeing it as impinging on their sovereignty (partly due to the necessary harmonisation of legal codes), Eurojust set up a working group to study the idea.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/29703|title=Europe lacks resources to tackle cross-border crime, says Eurojust|date=17 March 2010|website=EUobserver|accessdate=16 December 2022|archive-date=16 December 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221216164552/https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/29703|url-status=live}}</ref>
+In March 2010 Eurojust cited the European Public Prosecutor's Office as a potential solution to the problem of cross-border crime in the EU. Despite opposition from some member states seeing it as impinging on their sovereignty (partly due to the necessary harmonisation of legal codes), Eurojust set up a working group to study the idea.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/29703|title=Europe lacks resources to tackle cross-border crime, says Eurojust|date=17 March 2010|website=EUobserver|accessdate=16 December 2022|archive-date=16 December 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221216164552/https://euobserver.com/rule-of-law/29703|url-status=live}}</ref>
 === Spanish Presidency draft for the implementation of the EPPO ===
-In March 2010, during the Spanish Presidency, the [[Spanish Attorney General]] [[Cándido Conde-Pumpido]] officially launched a draft for the implementation of the European Prosecutor, pursuant to the provision of Article 86 of the Treaty of Lisbon. Conde-Pumpido, speaking with the President of the Commission of Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament, [[Juan Fernando López Aguilar]], and the Spanish [[Secretary of State for the European Union]] (SEUE), [[Diego López Garrido|Diego Lopez Garrido]], presented a technical project, developed from the conclusions of the International Conference convened by the Spanish Prosecutor in 2008 and 2009, which would be discussed later in the Luxembourg Council.
+In March 2010, during the Spanish Presidency, the [[Spanish Attorney General]] [[Cándido Conde-Pumpido]] officially launched a draft for the implementation of the European Prosecutor, under the provision of Article 86 of the Treaty of Lisbon. Conde-Pumpido, speaking with the President of the Commission of Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament, [[Juan Fernando López Aguilar]], and the Spanish [[Secretary of State for the European Union]] (SEUE), [[Diego López Garrido|Diego Lopez Garrido]], presented a technical project, developed from the conclusions of the International Conference convened by the Spanish Prosecutor in 2008 and 2009, which would be discussed later in the Luxembourg Council.
 The creation of this institution was subsequently discussed, according to the Spanish proposal, by the meeting of Ministers for Justice and Home Affairs held in Luxembourg on 27 April 2010, but its implementation was suspended until a new discussion in 2013.<ref>[http://www.diariojuridico.com/actualidad/noticias/insisten-con-la-idea-de-una-fiscalia-europea.html] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111219101139/http://www.diariojuridico.com/actualidad/noticias/insisten-con-la-idea-de-una-fiscalia-europea.html|date=19 December 2011}} España insiste en la Fiscalia Europea. Diario jurídico, 7 de mayo de 2010 {{in lang|es}}</ref>
@@ Line 86: / Line 89: @@
 * Doing nothing – criminal investigations of PIF offences are (still) conducted by Member State authorities exclusively;
-* Setting-up the EPPO with a limited mandate (PIF offences) – EPPO has priority competence to order investigations and direct prosecutions into PIF offences
+* Setting-up the EPPO with a limited mandate (PIF offenses) – EPPO has priority competence to order investigations and direct prosecutions into PIF offences
 * Setting up the EPPO with an extended mandate (PIF offences and serious cross-border crimes) – EPPO has exclusive/shared competence to order investigations and direct prosecutions into PIF offences and other serious cross-border crimes (money laundering, corruption, accounting offences).
-Besides these three options regarding scope, the Commission needed to consider a series of significant legal, institutional and organisational matters (relationship with Eurojust, [[European Anti-Fraud Office|OLAF]], member state authorities, judicial review) which could be formulated as sub-options. Moreover, particular procedural issues (EP involvement, legislative process, what if unanimity requirements are not met, enhanced co-operation with which member states, etc.) needed to be considered in these options. In accordance with Article 86 the proposal could include one or more regulations covering different aspects of the setting up of an EPPO. Soft law instruments were not relevant as legislative measures were needed to address criminal offences and law enforcement.
+Besides these three options regarding scope, the Commission needed to consider a series of significant legal, institutional, and organisational matters (relationship with Eurojust, [[European Anti-Fraud Office|OLAF]], member state authorities, judicial review) which could be formulated as sub-options. Moreover, particular procedural issues (EP involvement, legislative process, what if unanimity requirements are not met, enhanced cooperation with which member states, etc.) needed to be considered in these options. In accordance with Article 86, the proposal could include one or more regulations covering different aspects of the setting up of an EPPO. Soft law instruments were not relevant as legislative measures were needed to address criminal offences and law enforcement.
-Likely impacts will include a more effective, dissuasive and equivalent criminal law protection of the Union's financial interests. Irregularities affecting the European budget may reach or exceed €1 billion per year, from which around €280 million could be suspected EU fraud cases to be investigated within the EPPO's competence. This amount could be significantly reduced if the EPPO were to direct investigations and prosecutions throughout the EU, acting on all cases of PIF offences. Moreover, economies of scale might be achieved for the benefit of justice budgets of participating Member States, due to a streamlining of the judicial procedures involving EU financial interests across the EU.
+Likely impacts will include a more effective, dissuasive, and equivalent criminal law protection of the Union's financial interests. Irregularities affecting the European budget may reach or exceed €1 billion per year, from which around €280 million could be suspected EU fraud cases to be investigated within the EPPO's competence. This amount could be significantly reduced if the EPPO were to direct investigations and prosecutions throughout the EU, acting on all cases of PIF offences. Moreover, economies of scale might be achieved for the benefit of justice budgets of participating Member States, due to a streamlining of the judicial procedures involving EU financial interests across the EU.
 Depending on how the relationship between the EPPO and the national authorities would be defined, the impact would be primarily on national police and judicial authorities, which would certainly have to cope with the new framework for investigations and prosecutions ordered by the EPPO. The administrative burden would depend on the new relations established between the EPPO and the national authorities, and whether the initiative would impose new information obligations on Member States.
-Preparatory work, in particular the 2001 Green paper on the establishment of a European Prosecutor, was taken into consideration. Existing studies and evaluations, in particular the Criminal Justice Systems Study, the Euroneeds Study, the Pretrial investigative model rules, the Spanish Presidency Report, officially launched in Brussels in March 2010, etc. and studies regarding Eurojust, provided valuable input.
+Preparatory work, in particular the 2001 Green paper on the establishment of a European Prosecutor, was taken into consideration. Existing studies and evaluations, in particular the Criminal Justice Systems Study, the Euroneeds Study, the Pretrial investigative model rules, the Spanish Presidency Report, officially launched in Brussels in March 2010, etc., and studies regarding Eurojust, provided valuable input.
 ===National and European Parliaments===
-In November 2013 the Commission concluded that the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor's Office complied "with the principle of subsidiarity" in a report addressing the issue, after it was raised by 14 national parliamentary chambers in 11 Member States.<ref name="EPP Commission Review">{{cite news|url=http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/sefcovic/headlines/news/2013/11/2013_11_27_public_prosecutor_en.htm|title='YELLOW CARD' ON EPPO TRIGGERS COMMISSION REVIEW|publisher=Vice President of the European Commission|date=November 2013|access-date=3 June 2014|archive-date=7 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140607002856/http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/sefcovic/headlines/news/2013/11/2013_11_27_public_prosecutor_en.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> The European Parliament subsequently voted in favour of the commission's proposal to set up the body.<ref name="European Parliament backs European Public Prosecutors Office">{{cite news|url=http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2014/march/european-parliament-backs-european-public-prosecutors-office/|title=European Parliament backs European Public Prosecutor's office|publisher=out-law.com|date=14 March 2014|access-date=3 June 2014|archive-date=6 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140606224818/http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2014/march/european-parliament-backs-european-public-prosecutors-office/|url-status=live}}</ref> On 23 September 2019, the European Parliament and the [[Council of the European Union]] agreed on appointing [[Laura Codruța Kövesi]] as European Chief Prosecutor.<ref name="Kövesi to become EU Chief Prosecutor">{{cite news|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190923IPR61749/kovesi-to-become-eu-chief-prosecutor|title=Kövesi to become EU Chief Prosecutor|publisher=European Parliament|date=23 September 2019|access-date=25 September 2019|archive-date=25 September 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190925143537/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190923IPR61749/kovesi-to-become-eu-chief-prosecutor|url-status=live}}</ref>
+In November 2013 the Commission concluded that the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor's Office complied "with the principle of subsidiarity" in a report addressing the issue after it was raised by 14 national parliamentary chambers in 11 Member States.<ref name="EPP Commission Review">{{cite news|url=http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/sefcovic/headlines/news/2013/11/2013_11_27_public_prosecutor_en.htm|title='YELLOW CARD' ON EPPO TRIGGERS COMMISSION REVIEW|publisher=Vice President of the European Commission|date=November 2013|access-date=3 June 2014|archive-date=7 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140607002856/http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/sefcovic/headlines/news/2013/11/2013_11_27_public_prosecutor_en.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> The European Parliament subsequently voted in favour of the commission's proposal to set up the body.<ref name="European Parliament backs European Public Prosecutors Office">{{cite news|url=http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2014/march/european-parliament-backs-european-public-prosecutors-office/|title=European Parliament backs European Public Prosecutor's office|publisher=out-law.com|date=14 March 2014|access-date=3 June 2014|archive-date=6 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140606224818/http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2014/march/european-parliament-backs-european-public-prosecutors-office/|url-status=live}}</ref> On 23 September 2019, the European Parliament and the [[Council of the European Union]] agreed to appoint [[Laura Codruța Kövesi]] as European Chief Prosecutor.<ref name="Kövesi to become EU Chief Prosecutor">{{cite news|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190923IPR61749/kovesi-to-become-eu-chief-prosecutor|title=Kövesi to become EU Chief Prosecutor|publisher=European Parliament|date=23 September 2019|access-date=25 September 2019|archive-date=25 September 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190925143537/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190923IPR61749/kovesi-to-become-eu-chief-prosecutor|url-status=live}}</ref>
 ==Role and structure==
-The role of the EPPO is to investigate and prosecute fraud against the [[EU budget|budget of the European Union]] and other crimes against the EU's financial interests including fraud concerning EU funds of over €10,000 and cross-border [[value added tax|VAT]] fraud cases involving damages above €10 million. Previously, only state authorities could investigate and prosecute these crimes and could not act beyond their borders. [[OLAF]], [[Eurojust]] and [[Europol]] similarly had no ability to act. The body is intended to be decentralised, based around European Delegated Prosecutors located in each participating Member State. The central office consists of a European Chief Prosecutor supported by 22 European Prosecutors, as well as technical and investigatory staff. The EPPO may request a suspect's arrest, but this must be confirmed by the relevant state authority.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation_en|title=Judicial cooperation|website=European Commission - European Commission|access-date=27 September 2019|archive-date=5 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191005003509/https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation_en|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://globalcompliancenews.com/eu-public-prosecutors-office-20170620/|title=European Union introduces European Public Prosecutor's Office to fight crimes against the EU|first=Dr Nicolai|last=Behr|date=20 June 2017|access-date=20 June 2017|archive-date=1 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170701185955/https://globalcompliancenews.com/eu-public-prosecutors-office-20170620/|url-status=live}}</ref>
+The role of the EPPO is to investigate and prosecute fraud against the [[EU budget|budget of the European Union]] and other crimes against the EU's financial interests including fraud concerning EU funds of over €10,000 and cross-border [[value added tax|VAT]] fraud cases involving damages above €10 million. Previously, only state authorities could investigate and prosecute these crimes and could not act beyond their borders. [[OLAF]], [[Eurojust]], and [[Europol]] could not similarly act. The body is intended to be decentralised, based around European Delegated Prosecutors located in each participating Member State. The central office consists of a European Chief Prosecutor supported by 22 European Prosecutors, as well as technical and investigatory staff. The EPPO may request a suspect's arrest, but this must be confirmed by the relevant state authority.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation_en|title=Judicial cooperation|website=European Commission - European Commission|access-date=27 September 2019|archive-date=5 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191005003509/https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation_en|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://globalcompliancenews.com/eu-public-prosecutors-office-20170620/|title=European Union introduces European Public Prosecutor's Office to fight crimes against the EU|first=Dr Nicolai|last=Behr|date=20 June 2017|access-date=20 June 2017|archive-date=1 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170701185955/https://globalcompliancenews.com/eu-public-prosecutors-office-20170620/|url-status=live}}</ref>
-The EPPO has a two-tired structure and is described as a hybrid set-up.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The EPPO's Hybrid Structure and Legal Framework - eucrim|url=https://eucrim.eu/articles/the-eppos-hybrid-structure-and-legal-framework/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=eucrim.eu|language=en|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709184745/https://eucrim.eu/articles/the-eppos-hybrid-structure-and-legal-framework/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Auditors">{{Cite web|last=Auditors|first=European Court of|date=2019-07-05|title=New kid on the block: the European Public Prosecutor's Office|url=https://medium.com/ecajournal/new-kid-on-the-block-the-european-public-prosecutors-office-5f9413889a0|access-date=2021-07-08|website=Medium|language=en|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709190332/https://medium.com/ecajournal/new-kid-on-the-block-the-european-public-prosecutors-office-5f9413889a0|url-status=live}}</ref> The European Chief Prosecutor heads the EPPO, represents it externally, and presides over its college. Two deputies assist the chief prosecutor and function as European Chief Prosecutor in the absence of the chief prosecutor.<ref name="consilium.europa.eu">{{Cite web|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eppo/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=www.consilium.europa.eu|language=en|archive-date=1 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210701140555/https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref> The determination of the working language of the EPPO is a decision-making matter of the College of the EPPO.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Oberstaatsanwalt über Betrug mit EU-Geldern - Gute Nachrichten für europäische Steuerzahler|url=https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/oberstaatsanwalt-ueber-betrug-mit-eu-geldern-gute.990.de.html?dram:article_id=481885|access-date=2021-07-08|website=Deutschlandfunk Kultur|language=de-DE|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709190615/https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/oberstaatsanwalt-ueber-betrug-mit-eu-geldern-gute.990.de.html?dram:article_id=481885|url-status=live}}</ref> Since 30 September 2020, Art. Paragraph 1 of the EPPO Decision 002/2020 stipulates that English is the working language for operational and administrative activities. According to Art. 1(2) of the same decision, the French language shall be used in conjunction with English in communications with the ECJ.<ref>{{Cite web|last=EPPO/Kövesi|date=30 September 2020|title=Decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) of 30 September 2020 on Internal Language Arrangements|url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/2020.002_eppo_language_decision_signed.pdf|url-status=live|access-date=8 July 2021|archive-date=21 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210121220806/https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/2020.002_eppo_language_decision_signed.pdf}}</ref>
+The EPPO has a two-tiered structure and is described as a hybrid set-up.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The EPPO's Hybrid Structure and Legal Framework - eucrim|url=https://eucrim.eu/articles/the-eppos-hybrid-structure-and-legal-framework/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=eucrim.eu|language=en|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709184745/https://eucrim.eu/articles/the-eppos-hybrid-structure-and-legal-framework/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Auditors">{{Cite web|last=Auditors|first=European Court of|date=2019-07-05|title=New kid on the block: the European Public Prosecutor's Office|url=https://medium.com/ecajournal/new-kid-on-the-block-the-european-public-prosecutors-office-5f9413889a0|access-date=2021-07-08|website=Medium|language=en|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709190332/https://medium.com/ecajournal/new-kid-on-the-block-the-european-public-prosecutors-office-5f9413889a0|url-status=live}}</ref> The European Chief Prosecutor heads the EPPO, represents it externally, and presides over its college. Two deputies assist the chief prosecutor and function as European Chief Prosecutor in the absence of the chief prosecutor.<ref name="consilium.europa.eu">{{Cite web|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eppo/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=www.consilium.europa.eu|language=en|archive-date=1 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210701140555/https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref> The determination of the working language of the EPPO is a decision-making matter of the College of the EPPO.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Oberstaatsanwalt über Betrug mit EU-Geldern - Gute Nachrichten für europäische Steuerzahler|url=https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/oberstaatsanwalt-ueber-betrug-mit-eu-geldern-gute.990.de.html?dram:article_id=481885|access-date=2021-07-08|website=Deutschlandfunk Kultur|language=de-DE|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709190615/https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/oberstaatsanwalt-ueber-betrug-mit-eu-geldern-gute.990.de.html?dram:article_id=481885|url-status=live}}</ref> Since 30 September 2020, Art. Paragraph 1 of the EPPO Decision 002/2020 stipulates that English is the working language for operational and administrative activities. According to Art. 1(2) of the same decision, the French language shall be used in conjunction with English in communications with the ECJ.<ref>{{Cite web|last=EPPO/Kövesi|date=30 September 2020|title=Decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) of 30 September 2020 on Internal Language Arrangements|url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/2020.002_eppo_language_decision_signed.pdf|url-status=live|access-date=8 July 2021|archive-date=21 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210121220806/https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/2020.002_eppo_language_decision_signed.pdf}}</ref>
-During the establishment of the EPPO, an interim director performed the duties pursuant to Art. 20 of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. According to Art. 20 para. 1 lit. a of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, an official of the commission was to be appointed as Interim Director after consultation of the council. He was responsible for the interim administrative apparatus and undertook, for example, recruitment (service contracts, etc.), see Art. 20 (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 and the provision of financial liquidity for the initial phase of the EPPO as well as the search for a suitable location in Luxembourg.
+During the establishment of the EPPO, an interim director performed the duties under Art. 20 of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1939. According to Art. 20 para. 1 lit. a of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, an official of the commission was to be appointed as Interim Director after consultation with the council. He was responsible for the interim administrative apparatus and undertook, for example, recruitment (service contracts, etc.), see Art. 20 (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 and the provision of financial liquidity for the initial phase of the EPPO as well as the search for a suitable location in Luxembourg.
 === The College (Governing Body) ===
@@ Line 112: / Line 115: @@
 ==== European Prosecutors ====
-The European Prosecutors are distinct from the European Delegated Prosecutors and the European Chief Prosecutor. The European Prosecutors supervise the European Delegated Prosecutors, who conduct investigations on the ground in the participating Member States.{{citation needed|date=April 2022}} At the end of July 2020, the first cohort of European Prosecutors were appointed by the Council of the EU.<ref>{{Cite web|title=College of the EU Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/college-of-the-european-public-prosecutor-s-office-eppo/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=www.consilium.europa.eu|language=en|archive-date=2 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210702075805/https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/college-of-the-european-public-prosecutor-s-office-eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref> On 28 September 2020, the European Public Prosecutors were sworn in before the judge responsible at the European Court of Justice.<ref>{{cite tweet |title=WATCH 📹 the moment the European Chief Prosecutor and 22 European prosecutors took their oath of office before @EUCourtPress , a great  privilege for the #EPPO. 🇪🇺 |user=euprosecutor |number=1311598588947058688}}</ref>
+The European Prosecutors are distinct from the European Delegated Prosecutors and the European Chief Prosecutor. The European Prosecutors supervise the European Delegated Prosecutors, who conduct investigations on the ground in the participating Member States.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Kuhl |first1=Lothar |title=The European Public Prosecutor’s Office – More Effective, Equivalent, and Independent Criminal Prosecution against Fraud? |url=https://eucrim.eu/articles/eppo-more-effective-equivalent-and-independent-prosecution/ |website=EUCRIM.eu |publisher=Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law |access-date=4 July 2024}}</ref> At the end of July 2020, the first cohort of European Prosecutors was appointed by the Council of the EU.<ref>{{Cite web|title=College of the EU Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO)|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/college-of-the-european-public-prosecutor-s-office-eppo/|access-date=2021-07-08|website=www.consilium.europa.eu|language=en|archive-date=2 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210702075805/https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/college-of-the-european-public-prosecutor-s-office-eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref> On 28 September 2020, the European Public Prosecutors were sworn in before the judge responsible at the European Court of Justice.<ref>{{cite tweet |title=WATCH 📹 the moment the European Chief Prosecutor and 22 European prosecutors took their oath of office before @EUCourtPress , a great privilege for the #EPPO. 🇪🇺 |user=euprosecutor |number=1311598588947058688}}</ref>
 The decisions of the college are based on internal decision-making rules (Procedural Rules).<ref>{{Cite web|title=The EPPO's Structure and Powers—1 European Head, 22 National Swords|url=https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2019/11/the-eppos-structure-and-powers|access-date=2021-07-08|website=Debevoise|language=en-US|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709184659/https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2019/11/the-eppos-structure-and-powers|url-status=live}}</ref>
@@ Line 214: / Line 217: @@
 |2
 |2
+|-
+|Poland
+|
+|
+|
 |-
 |Portugal
@@ Line 239: / Line 247: @@
 |5
 |6
+|-
+|Sweden
+|
+|
+|
 |}
 <small>Source: EPPO News "European Delegated Prosecutors Overview per Country"</small><ref>{{Cite web|title=European Delegated Prosecutors: an overview per country {{!}} European Public Prosecutor's Office|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/european-delegated-prosecutors-overview-country|access-date=2021-07-08|website=www.eppo.europa.eu|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709184600/https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/european-delegated-prosecutors-overview-country|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College {{!}} European Public Prosecutor's Office|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-european-delegated-prosecutor-appointed-college|access-date=2021-08-02|website=www.eppo.europa.eu|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185253/https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-european-delegated-prosecutor-appointed-college|url-status=live}}</ref>
 ==== The Finnish Delay ====
-When the EPPO launched its operations on 1 June 2021, Finland and Slovenia had failed to appoint their respective European Delegated Prosecutors. In Finland, the delay was due to a debate between the Finnish government wishing to only appoint part-time prosecutors because of a low expected workload, while European Chief Prosecutor Laura Kövesi insisted all European Delegated Prosecutors were to work on a full-time contract.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-06-04|title=Finland strikes staffing deal with new EU prosecutor's office|url=https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-makes-deal-european-public-prosecutors-office/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=POLITICO|language=en-US|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709190813/https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-makes-deal-european-public-prosecutors-office/|url-status=live}}</ref> A compromise was worked out in the beginning of June 2021<ref>{{Cite news|last=EPPO|date=4 June 2021|title=Finnish authorities and the EPPO reach an agreement regarding European Delegated Prosecutors|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-authorities-and-eppo-reach-agreement-regarding-european-delegated-prosecutors|access-date=9 July 2021|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185755/https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-authorities-and-eppo-reach-agreement-regarding-european-delegated-prosecutors|url-status=live}}</ref> and the college appointed the Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor a month later.<ref>{{Cite news|last=EPPO|date=5 July 2021|title=Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-european-delegated-prosecutor-appointed-college|access-date=9 July 2021|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185253/https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-european-delegated-prosecutor-appointed-college|url-status=live}}</ref>
+When the EPPO launched its operations on 1 June 2021, Finland and Slovenia had failed to appoint their respective European Delegated Prosecutors. In Finland, the delay was due to a debate between the Finnish government wishing to only appoint part-time prosecutors because of a low expected workload, while European Chief Prosecutor Laura Kövesi insisted all European Delegated Prosecutors were to work on a full-time contract.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-06-04|title=Finland strikes staffing deal with new EU prosecutor's office|url=https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-makes-deal-european-public-prosecutors-office/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=POLITICO|language=en-US|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709190813/https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-makes-deal-european-public-prosecutors-office/|url-status=live}}</ref> A compromise was worked out at the beginning of June 2021<ref>{{Cite news|last=EPPO|date=4 June 2021|title=Finnish authorities and the EPPO reach an agreement regarding European Delegated Prosecutors|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-authorities-and-eppo-reach-agreement-regarding-european-delegated-prosecutors|access-date=9 July 2021|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185755/https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-authorities-and-eppo-reach-agreement-regarding-european-delegated-prosecutors|url-status=live}}</ref> and the college appointed the Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor a month later.<ref>{{Cite news|last=EPPO|date=5 July 2021|title=Finnish European Delegated Prosecutor appointed by the College|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-european-delegated-prosecutor-appointed-college|access-date=9 July 2021|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185253/https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/finnish-european-delegated-prosecutor-appointed-college|url-status=live}}</ref>
 ==== The Janša Appointment Affair ====
-Shortly before the repeatedly postponed but then set 1 June 2021 starting date of the EPPO, it emerged that Slovenia's acting head of government [[Janez Janša]] prevented the selection and nomination of two Slovenian European Delegated Prosecutors. In the wake of this, Slovenia's then Minister for Justice [[Lilijana Kozlovič]]  resigned from her post on 27 May 2021.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Maček|first=Sebastijan R.|date=2021-05-28|title=Slovenian justice chief resigns after government annuls EPPO procedure|url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/slovenian-justice-chief-resigns-after-government-annuls-eppo-procedure/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=www.euractiv.com|language=en-GB|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185255/https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/slovenian-justice-chief-resigns-after-government-annuls-eppo-procedure/|url-status=live}}</ref> Kozlovič belongs to the smaller ruling party SMC, and had asked the independent Prosecutorial Council to appoint two suitable candidates. ORF and other media reported that Janša might have opposed the nomination of the two prosecutors because they had also been involved in investigations against him in the past.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=red|first=ORF at/Agenturen|date=2021-05-27|title=Slowenien: Ministerin in Streit mit Jansa zurückgetreten|url=https://orf.at/stories/3214999/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=news.ORF.at|language=de|archive-date=3 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210603022105/https://orf.at/stories/3214999/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Zdravko Počivalšek]], Slovenia's Minister of Economy and head of the coalition party SMC, also intervened in the dispute. Počivalšek considered the appointment of only one European Delegated Prosecutor from Slovenia by Janša – the compromise [[Didier Reynders]], EU Justice Commissioner, had proposed as an interim solution – to be an overstepping of competence by the government, the government to which he himself belongs. Počivalšek criticised the EU for exerting pressure in the matter of the hasty appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors and pointed out that participation in the EU authority was voluntary.<ref name=":0" /> The European Chief Prosecutor countered and referred to the very long preparation time. She considers the non-appointment or untimely appointment to be a bad omen, so to speak.<ref>{{Cite news|last=LTO|title=Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft startet|language=de|work=Legal Tribune Online|url=https://www.lto.de/recht/justiz/j/eu-staatsanwaltschaft-start-betrug-umsatzsteuer-subventionen-geldwaesche-ermittlungen/|access-date=2021-07-09|archive-date=13 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210613083901/https://www.lto.de/recht/justiz/j/eu-staatsanwaltschaft-start-betrug-umsatzsteuer-subventionen-geldwaesche-ermittlungen/|url-status=live}}</ref>
+Shortly before the repeatedly postponed but then set 1 June 2021 starting date of the EPPO, it emerged that Slovenia's acting head of government [[Janez Janša]] prevented the selection and nomination of two Slovenian European Delegated Prosecutors. In the wake of this, Slovenia's then Minister for Justice [[Lilijana Kozlovič]]  resigned from her post on 27 May 2021.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Maček|first=Sebastijan R.|date=2021-05-28|title=Slovenian justice chief resigns after government annuls EPPO procedure|url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/slovenian-justice-chief-resigns-after-government-annuls-eppo-procedure/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=www.euractiv.com|language=en-GB|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709185255/https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/slovenian-justice-chief-resigns-after-government-annuls-eppo-procedure/|url-status=live}}</ref> Kozlovič belongs to the smaller ruling party SMC and had asked the independent Prosecutorial Council to appoint two suitable candidates. ORF and other media reported that Janša might have opposed the nomination of the two prosecutors because they had also been involved in investigations against him in the past.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=red|first=ORF at/Agenturen|date=2021-05-27|title=Slowenien: Ministerin in Streit mit Jansa zurückgetreten|url=https://orf.at/stories/3214999/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=news.ORF.at|language=de|archive-date=3 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210603022105/https://orf.at/stories/3214999/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Zdravko Počivalšek]], Slovenia's Minister of Economy and head of the coalition party SMC, also intervened in the dispute. Počivalšek considered the appointment of only one European Delegated Prosecutor from Slovenia by Janša – the compromise [[Didier Reynders]], EU Justice Commissioner, had proposed as an interim solution – to be an overstepping of competence by the government, the government to which he belongs. Počivalšek criticised the EU for exerting pressure in the matter of the hasty appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors and pointed out that participation in the EU authority was voluntary.<ref name=":0" /> The European Chief Prosecutor countered and referred to the very long preparation time. She considers the non-appointment or untimely appointment to be a bad omen, so to speak.<ref>{{Cite news|last=LTO|title=Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft startet|language=de|work=Legal Tribune Online|url=https://www.lto.de/recht/justiz/j/eu-staatsanwaltschaft-start-betrug-umsatzsteuer-subventionen-geldwaesche-ermittlungen/|access-date=2021-07-09|archive-date=13 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210613083901/https://www.lto.de/recht/justiz/j/eu-staatsanwaltschaft-start-betrug-umsatzsteuer-subventionen-geldwaesche-ermittlungen/|url-status=live}}</ref>
 The issue gained prominence as it coincided with Slovenia taking over the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU on 1 July 2021, causing many Members of the European Parliament and even European Commission President [[Ursula von der Leyen]] to urge Janša to swiftly appoint the Slovenian European Delegated Prosecutors during a parliamentary plenary debate.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-07-06|title=Slovenia's EU presidency off to a rough start|url=https://www.euronews.com/2021/07/06/slovenia-s-eu-presidency-off-to-a-rough-start-amplifying-concerns-on-press-freedom|access-date=2021-07-09|website=euronews|language=en|archive-date=9 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210709192916/https://www.euronews.com/2021/07/06/slovenia-s-eu-presidency-off-to-a-rough-start-amplifying-concerns-on-press-freedom|url-status=live}}</ref>
 ==Legislative procedure through enhanced cooperation==
-The [[European Commission]] proposed a regulation on the establishment of a Public Procecutor's Office on 17 July 2013, based on a mandate in the Treaty of Lisbon to set up such an office.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Nielsen |first1=Nikolaj |title=Brussels explores creation of 'EU public prosecutor' |url=http://euobserver.com/justice/116485 |work=EUobserver |date=5 June 2012 |language=en |access-date=30 January 2013 |archive-date=23 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121223083607/http://euobserver.com/justice/116485 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Protecting taxpayers' money against fraud: Commission proposes European Public Prosecutor's Office and reinforces OLAF procedural guarantees |url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-709_en.htm |website=europa.eu |access-date=10 August 2013 |archive-date=12 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130812001958/http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-709_en.htm |url-status=live }}</ref>  However, on 7 February 2017 the Council concluded that no consensus existed among the member states on the proposed regulation.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/02/07-epo-enhanced-cooperation/|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office : Council takes first step towards a possible enhanced cooperation|date=2017-02-07|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021221108/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/02/07-epo-enhanced-cooperation/|url-status=live}}</ref>  As a result, 17 EU member states (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain) requested on 14 February 2017 that the proposal be referred to the European Council for their consideration.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/03/pdf/eppo-factsheet_pdf/|title=Proposal on the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - State of play|date=2017-03-07|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]}}{{Dead link|date=August 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>  After no agreement was reached at the European Council on 9 March 2017,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2017/03/09-conclusions-pec_pdf/|title=Conclusions by the President of the European Council|date=2017-03-09|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[European Council]]|archive-date=26 September 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170926221357/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2017/03/09-conclusions-pec_pdf/|url-status=live}}</ref> 16 members states (the prior 17 less Austria, Estonia and Latvia, plus Cyprus and Portugal) notified the European Parliament, the council and the commission on 3 April 2017 that they would proceed with establishing the EPPO by the use of [[enhanced cooperation]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/03-eppo/|title=European public prosecutor's office : 16 member states together to fight fraud against the EU budget|date=2017-04-03|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021221120/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/03-eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref>  This was done under [[s:Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union/Title V: Area of Freedom, Security and Justice|TFEU Article 86]], which allows for a simplified enhanced cooperation procedure which does not require authorization from the council to proceed. The participating member states agreed on the legislative text to establish the EPPO on 8 June 2017.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/06/08-eppo/|title=20 member states agree on details on creating the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - Consilium|website=www.consilium.europa.eu|language=en|access-date=2017-06-11|archive-date=19 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170619050510/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/06/08-eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref>  By this point, Latvia and Estonia had begun participating in the enhanced cooperation procedure.  The proposal was approved by the [[European Parliament]] on 5 October 2017,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en&reference=2013%2F0255%28APP%29|title=Procedure file - 2013/0255(APP) - European Public Prosecutor's Office|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[European Parliament]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021220624/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en&reference=2013%2F0255%28APP%29|url-status=live}}</ref> and on 12 October 2017 the regulation was given final approval by the 20 participating member states, which had grown to include Austria and Italy.<ref name=reg>{{cite journal|url=http://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj|title=Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office ('the EPPO')|date=2017-10-31|access-date=2017-10-31|journal=[[Official Journal of the European Union]]|volume=L 283/1|archive-date=22 January 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180122022933/http://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj|url-status=live}}</ref> The EPPO did not have authority to begin investigating or prosecuting crimes until a decision of the Commission approved this, which per the terms of the Regulation could not take place until 3 years after the entry into force of the Regulation in November 2017.<ref name=reg/>  On 6 May 2021 the commission's decision launching operations was adopted, with a starting date of 1 June 2021.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation/networks-and-bodies-supporting-judicial-cooperation/european-public-prosecutors-office_en|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO)|accessdate=2021-10-11|publisher=[[European Commission]]|archive-date=29 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180929220805/https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation/networks-and-bodies-supporting-judicial-cooperation/european-public-prosecutors-office_en|url-status=live}}</ref>
+The [[European Commission]] proposed a regulation on the establishment of a Public Procecutor's Office on 17 July 2013, based on a mandate in the Treaty of Lisbon to set up such an office.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Nielsen |first1=Nikolaj |title=Brussels explores creation of 'EU public prosecutor' |url=http://euobserver.com/justice/116485 |work=EUobserver |date=5 June 2012 |language=en |access-date=30 January 2013 |archive-date=23 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121223083607/http://euobserver.com/justice/116485 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Protecting taxpayers' money against fraud: Commission proposes European Public Prosecutor's Office and reinforces OLAF procedural guarantees |url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-709_en.htm |website=europa.eu |access-date=10 August 2013 |archive-date=12 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130812001958/http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-709_en.htm |url-status=live }}</ref>  However, on 7 February 2017, the Council concluded that no consensus existed among the member states on the proposed regulation.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/02/07-epo-enhanced-cooperation/|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office : Council takes first step towards a possible enhanced cooperation|date=2017-02-07|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021221108/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/02/07-epo-enhanced-cooperation/|url-status=live}}</ref>  As a result, 17 EU member states (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain) requested on 14 February 2017 that the proposal be referred to the European Council for their consideration.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/03/pdf/eppo-factsheet_pdf/|title=Proposal on the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - State of play|date=2017-03-07|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]}}{{Dead link|date=August 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>  After no agreement was reached at the European Council on 9 March 2017,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2017/03/09-conclusions-pec_pdf/|title=Conclusions by the President of the European Council|date=2017-03-09|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[European Council]]|archive-date=26 September 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170926221357/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2017/03/09-conclusions-pec_pdf/|url-status=live}}</ref> 16 member states (the prior 17 less Austria, Estonia, and Latvia, plus Cyprus and Portugal) notified the European Parliament, the council, and the commission on 3 April 2017 that they would proceed with establishing the EPPO by the use of [[enhanced cooperation]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/03-eppo/|title=European public prosecutor's office : 16 member states together to fight fraud against the EU budget|date=2017-04-03|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021221120/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/03-eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref>  This was done under [[s:Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union/Title V: Area of Freedom, Security and Justice|TFEU Article 86]], which allows for a simplified enhanced cooperation procedure that does not require authorization from the council to proceed. The participating member states agreed on the legislative text to establish the EPPO on 8 June 2017.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/06/08-eppo/|title=20 member states agree on details on creating the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - Consilium|website=www.consilium.europa.eu|language=en|access-date=2017-06-11|archive-date=19 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170619050510/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/06/08-eppo/|url-status=live}}</ref>  By this point, Latvia and Estonia had begun participating in the enhanced cooperation procedure.  The proposal was approved by the [[European Parliament]] on 5 October 2017,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en&reference=2013%2F0255%28APP%29|title=Procedure file - 2013/0255(APP) - European Public Prosecutor's Office|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[European Parliament]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021220624/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en&reference=2013%2F0255%28APP%29|url-status=live}}</ref> and on 12 October 2017, the regulation was given final approval by the 20 participating member states, which had grown to include Austria and Italy.<ref name=reg>{{cite journal|url=http://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj|title=Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office ('the EPPO')|date=2017-10-31|access-date=2017-10-31|journal=[[Official Journal of the European Union]]|volume=L 283/1|archive-date=22 January 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180122022933/http://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/1939/oj|url-status=live}}</ref> The EPPO did not have the authority to begin investigating or prosecuting crimes until a decision of the Commission approved this, which per the terms of the Regulation could not take place until 3 years after the entry into force of the Regulation in November 2017.<ref name=reg/>  On 6 May 2021, the commission's decision to launch operations was adopted, with a starting date of 1 June 2021.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation/networks-and-bodies-supporting-judicial-cooperation/european-public-prosecutors-office_en|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office (the EPPO)|accessdate=2021-10-11|publisher=[[European Commission]]|archive-date=29 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180929220805/https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/cross-border-cases/judicial-cooperation/networks-and-bodies-supporting-judicial-cooperation/european-public-prosecutors-office_en|url-status=live}}</ref>
 == EPPO members ==
-[[File:European Public Prosecutor member states.svg|thumb|{{legend|#0088cc|EU members participating}} {{legend|#ff6666|EU members not participating}}]]
+[[File:European Public Prosecutor member states.svg|thumb|{{legend|#003399|EU members participating}} {{legend|#DA2131|EU members not participating}}]]
-EU member states participate in the [[enhanced cooperation]]. The original regulation was joined by 20 member states.<ref name=confirm>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/10/12-eppo-20-ms-confirms/|title=20 member states confirm the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2017-10-12|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021220905/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/10/12-eppo-20-ms-confirms/|url-status=live}}</ref> Other member states, apart from Denmark which has an [[Opt-outs in the European Union|opt-out]] from the [[area of freedom, security and justice]] (AFSJ), are permitted to join subsequently.  (Ireland also has an opt-out from the AFSJ, but the form of its opt-out is more flexible, giving it the ability to opt-in on a case-by-case basis.)
+EU member states participate in the [[enhanced cooperation]].<ref name=":1" /> The original regulation was joined by 20 member states.<ref name=confirm>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/10/12/eppo-20-ms-confirms/|title=20 member states confirm the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2017-10-12|access-date=2017-10-21|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=21 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171021220905/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/10/12/eppo-20-ms-confirms/|url-status=live}}</ref> Other member states, apart from Denmark which has an [[Opt-outs in the European Union|opt-out]] from the [[area of freedom, security and justice]] (AFSJ), are permitted to join subsequently.  (Ireland also has an opt-out from the AFSJ, but the form of its opt-out is more flexible, giving it the ability to opt in on a case-by-case basis.)
-Following the [[Third Rutte Cabinet|Rutte III Cabinet]] taking office<ref>{{cite web|url=https://fd.nl/economie-politiek/1221875/nederland-sluit-zich-aan-bij-europees-om|language=nl|access-date=21 October 2017|date=10 October 2017|author=Jeroen Segenhout|title=Nederland sluit zich aan bij Europees OM|archive-date=20 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200920210438/https://fd.nl/economie-politiek/1221875/nederland-sluit-zich-aan-bij-europees-om|url-status=live}}</ref> the Netherlands officially requested to join the EPPO on 14 May 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8939-2018-INIT/en/pdf|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office - update on the implementation|date=2018-05-30|access-date=2018-06-12|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=13 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180613040802/http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8939-2018-INIT/en/pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35542/st09680-en18.pdf|title=OUTCOME OF THE COUNCIL MEETING - 3622nd Council meeting - Justice and Home Affairs|date=2018-06-05|access-date=2018-06-09|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=15 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180615074540/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35542/st09680-en18.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> Their participation was approved by the commission on 1 August 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4770_en.htm|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office: The Netherlands becomes 21st country to join common efforts to protect EU budget against fraud|date=2018-08-01|access-date=2018-08-02|publisher=[[European Commission]]|archive-date=2 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180802192953/http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4770_en.htm|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018D1094|title=COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1094 of 1 August 2018 confirming the participation of the Netherlands in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office|accessdate=16 December 2022|archive-date=28 June 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220628155506/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018D1094|url-status=live}}</ref>  Malta requested to join on 14 June 2018,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.mt/en/Government/Press%20Releases/Pages/2018/June/14/pr181346.aspx|title=PRESS RELEASE BY THE MINISTRY FOR JUSTICE, CULTURE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Malta joins the European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2018-06-14|access-date=2018-06-15|newspaper=Government of Malta|archive-date=16 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180616054110/https://www.gov.mt/en/Government/Press%20Releases/Pages/2018/June/14/pr181346.aspx|url-status=live}}</ref> and their participation was approved on 7 August 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEX-18-4881_en.htm|title=European Commission - Daily News|date=2018-08-07|access-date=2018-08-08|publisher=[[European Commission]]|archive-date=7 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180807130705/http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEX-18-4881_en.htm|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2018.201.01.0002.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2018:201:TOC|title=COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1103 of 7 August 2018 confirming the participation of Malta in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2018-08-07|access-date=2018-08-07|journal=[[Official Journal of the European Union]]|archive-date=9 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180809025401/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2018.201.01.0002.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2018:201:TOC|url-status=live}}</ref>  In a speech in April 2019, [[Stefan Löfven]], [[Prime Minister of Sweden]], stated that he would recommend to the Swedish Parliament that the country join the EPPO.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.government.se/speeches/20192/04/speech-by-prime-minister-stefan-lofven-in-european-parliament-3-april-2019/|title=Speech by Prime Minister Stefan Lofven in European Parliament 3 april 2019|date=2019-04-03|access-date=2019-05-11|publisher=[[Government of Sweden]]|archive-date=11 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190511233628/https://www.government.se/speeches/20192/04/speech-by-prime-minister-stefan-lofven-in-european-parliament-3-april-2019/|url-status=live}}</ref> On 13 November 2019, on behalf of his government, he declared that joining the EPPO is first among three objectives on EU policy for his government.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.government.se/speeches/20192/11/statement-of-government-eu-policy/|title=Speech from Prime Minister's Office|date=2019-11-13|access-date=2020-01-30|publisher=[[Government of Sweden]]|archive-date=13 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191113142629/https://www.government.se/speeches/20192/11/statement-of-government-eu-policy/|url-status=live}}</ref> In January 2024 the Swedish government initiated the legislative procedure required to join the EPPO.<ref>{{citeweb|url=https://www.government.se/press-releases/2024/01/more-effective-law-enforcement-through-swedens-participation-in-eppo/|title=More effective law enforcement through Sweden’s participation in EPPO|date=2024-01-26|accessdate=2024-02-03|publisher=[[Government of Sweden]]}}</ref> Following the [[Third Cabinet of Donald Tusk|Tusk III Cabinet]] being installed as the governmant of Poland, it approved joining the EPPO December 27.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.pl/web/sprawiedliwosc/rzad-zaakceptowal-wniosek-ministra-sprawiedliwosci-o-przystapieniu-do-prokuratury-europejskiej|title=The government accepted the application of the Minister of Justice to join the European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2023-12-27|accessdate=2023-12-28|publisher=Government of Poland}}</ref>  On 5 January 2024 it submitted its application to join to the European Commission, which must review it within four months.<ref>{{citeweb|url=https://tvn24.pl/tvn24-news-in-english/polands-justice-minister-signs-polands-request-to-join-eppo-7710163|title=Justice minister signs Poland's bid to join EPPO|date=2024-01-05|accessdate=2024-02-03|publisher=[[TVN24]]}}</ref>
+Following the [[Third Rutte Cabinet|Rutte III Cabinet]] taking office<ref>{{cite web|url=https://fd.nl/economie-politiek/1221875/nederland-sluit-zich-aan-bij-europees-om|language=nl|access-date=21 October 2017|date=10 October 2017|author=Jeroen Segenhout|title=Nederland sluit zich aan bij Europees OM|archive-date=20 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200920210438/https://fd.nl/economie-politiek/1221875/nederland-sluit-zich-aan-bij-europees-om|url-status=live}}</ref> the Netherlands officially requested to join the EPPO on 14 May 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8939-2018-INIT/en/pdf|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office - update on the implementation|date=2018-05-30|access-date=2018-06-12|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=13 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180613040802/http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8939-2018-INIT/en/pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35542/st09680-en18.pdf|title=OUTCOME OF THE COUNCIL MEETING - 3622nd Council meeting - Justice and Home Affairs|date=2018-06-05|access-date=2018-06-09|publisher=[[Council of the European Union]]|archive-date=15 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180615074540/http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35542/st09680-en18.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> Their participation was approved by the commission on 1 August 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4770_en.htm|title=European Public Prosecutor's Office: The Netherlands becomes 21st country to join common efforts to protect EU budget against fraud|date=2018-08-01|access-date=2018-08-02|publisher=[[European Commission]]|archive-date=2 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180802192953/http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4770_en.htm|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018D1094|title=COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1094 of 1 August 2018 confirming the participation of the Netherlands in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office|accessdate=16 December 2022|archive-date=28 June 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220628155506/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018D1094|url-status=live}}</ref>  Malta requested to join on 14 June 2018,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.mt/en/Government/Press%20Releases/Pages/2018/June/14/pr181346.aspx|title=PRESS RELEASE BY THE MINISTRY FOR JUSTICE, CULTURE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Malta joins the European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2018-06-14|access-date=2018-06-15|newspaper=Government of Malta|archive-date=16 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180616054110/https://www.gov.mt/en/Government/Press%20Releases/Pages/2018/June/14/pr181346.aspx|url-status=live}}</ref> and their participation was approved on 7 August 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEX-18-4881_en.htm|title=European Commission - Daily News|date=2018-08-07|access-date=2018-08-08|publisher=[[European Commission]]|archive-date=7 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180807130705/http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEX-18-4881_en.htm|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2018.201.01.0002.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2018:201:TOC|title=COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/1103 of 7 August 2018 confirming the participation of Malta in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2018-08-07|access-date=2018-08-07|journal=[[Official Journal of the European Union]]|archive-date=9 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180809025401/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2018.201.01.0002.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2018:201:TOC|url-status=live}}</ref>  Following the [[Third Cabinet of Donald Tusk|Tusk III Cabinet]] being installed as the government of Poland, it applied to join on 5 January 2024 to the European Commission.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://tvn24.pl/tvn24-news-in-english/polands-justice-minister-signs-polands-request-to-join-eppo-7710163|title=Justice minister signs Poland's bid to join EPPO|date=2024-01-05|accessdate=2024-02-03|publisher=[[TVN24]]}}</ref> The application was approved on 29 February 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Polska częścią Prokuratury Europejskiej - Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości - Portal Gov.pl |url=https://www.gov.pl/web/sprawiedliwosc/polska-czescia-prokuratury-europejskiej |access-date=2024-02-29 |website=Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości |language=pl-PL}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_1222|title=Poland's efforts to restore rule of law pave the way for accessing up to €137 billion in EU funds|date=2024-02-29|accessdate=2024-03-03|publisher=[[European Commission]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202400807&qid=1709497966755|title=COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2024/807 of 29 February 2024 confirming the participation of Poland in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office|date=2024-02-29|accessdate=2024-03-03|journal=[[Official Journal of the European Union]]|volume=L 807}}</ref>  On 13 November 2019 [[Stefan Löfven]], [[Prime Minister of Sweden]], declared that joining the EPPO was first among three EU policy objectives for his government.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.government.se/speeches/20192/11/statement-of-government-eu-policy/|title=Speech from Prime Minister's Office|date=2019-11-13|access-date=2020-01-30|publisher=[[Government of Sweden]]|archive-date=13 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191113142629/https://www.government.se/speeches/20192/11/statement-of-government-eu-policy/|url-status=live}}</ref> In March 2024 the Swedish government submitted a bill to parliament containing legislation to enable joining the EPPO,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.regeringen.se/pressmeddelanden/2024/03/regeringen-overlamnar-proposition-om-svenskt-deltagande-i-den-europeiska-aklagarmyndigheten-eppo/|title=The government submits a bill on Swedish participation in the European Public Prosecutor's Office (Eppo)|date=2024-03-13|accessdate=2024-03-16|publisher=[[Government of Sweden]]}}</ref> which was approved on 29 May.  On 5 June 2024, the Swedish government notified its request to participate in the EPPO to the Council of Ministers and the EU Commission, which the EU Commission approved on 16 July 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Daily News 16 / 07 / 2024 |url=https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_24_3822 |access-date=2024-07-16 |website=European Commission - European Commission}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L_202401952|title=Commission Decision (EU) 2024/1952 of 16 July 2024 confirming the participation of Sweden in the enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office|date=2024-07-18|accessdate=2024-07-18|journal=[[Official Journal of the European Union]]|volume=L 1952}}</ref>
 '''Members'''
@@ Line 278: / Line 291: @@
 * [[Malta]]
 * [[Netherlands]]
+* [[Poland]]
 * [[Portugal]]
 * [[Romania]]
@@ Line 283: / Line 297: @@
 * [[Slovenia]]
 * [[Spain]]
+* [[Sweden]]
 {{div col end}}
-'''Non-participants''' (may join any time)
+'''Non-participants'''
+* [[Denmark]] (opt-out)
-{{div col|colwidth=10em}}
 * [[Hungary]]
+* [[Ireland]] (opt-out, with ability to opt-in)
-* [[Poland]]
-* [[Sweden]]
-{{div col end}}
-'''Opt-out from AFSJ'''
-* [[Denmark]]
-* [[Ireland]] (opt-in)
 ==Legal basis==
@@ Line 301: / Line 309: @@
 '''Establishment'''
-* The [[Council of the European Union]], by a special legislative procedure, may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office on the basis of [[Eurojust]].
+* The [[Council of the European Union]], by a special legislative procedure, may establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office besed on [[Eurojust]].
 * This must be done by unanimity in the council and with the consent of the [[European Parliament]].
 * If the Council cannot reach unanimity, a group of at least nine [[Member State of the European Union|member states]] may refer a draft to the [[European Council]].
-* Those member states may also proceed to establish [[enhanced co-operation]] between themselves after informing Parliament, the council and the commission.
+* Those member states may also proceed to establish [[enhanced co-operation|enhanced cooperation]] between themselves after informing Parliament, the council, and the commission.
 '''Role'''
@@ Line 310: / Line 318: @@
 * It shall exercise this function in the relevant national courts.
 * The regulations establishing the office shall determine rules governing how it performs its duties including the admissibility of evidence.
-* The European Council may amend the treaty, after consulting the commission and gaining the consent of Parliament, to extend its powers to include serious cross border crime.
+* The European Council may amend the treaty, after consulting the commission and gaining the consent of Parliament, to extend its powers to include serious cross-border crime.
 == List of European Chief Prosecutors ==
@@ Line 328: / Line 336: @@
 ==Prospects for the future==
-So far, the limited mission of the EPPO is to investigate, prosecute and bring to judgement, before national courts, persons suspected of offences affecting the financial interests of the Union. The so-called 'PIF Directive' sets out what those offences are. But the mission of EPPO may also be extended in the future to cover other serious cross-border crimes.
+So far, the limited mission of the EPPO is to investigate, prosecute and bring to judgement, before national courts, persons suspected of offences affecting the financial interests of the Union. The so-called 'PIF Directive' sets out what those offences are. However the mission of EPPO may also be extended in the future to cover other serious cross-border crimes.
-The functions of EPPO are carried out by European delegated prosecutors in the participating member states who have the same powers as national public prosecutors in addition to the powers conferred on them by Union law. For instance, the European delegated prosecutor can issue an EAW or request that a competent national judicial authority issues an EAW.
+The functions of EPPO are carried out by European delegated prosecutors in the participating member states who have the same powers as national public prosecutors in addition to the powers conferred on them by Union law. For instance, the European delegated prosecutor can issue an EAW or request that a competent national judicial authority issue an EAW.
+==Budget and enlargement==
+In light of the acceleration of the disbursement of the [[Next Generation EU|EU recovery plan]] funds as well as the potential upcoming enlargement of EPPO to Poland and Sweden, in February 2024, EPPO formally asked for a €7.8 million increase of its 2024 budget, to reach a total of €79.7 million. <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/eppo-requests-increase-budget-allow-successful-enlargement-eppo-zone |title=EPPO requests an increase in budget to allow for successful enlargement of EPPO zone |date=23 February 2024 |accessdate=26 February 2024|publisher=EPPO}}</ref>
 ==See also==
@@ Line 351: / Line 363: @@
 [[Category:Political offices of the European Union]]
 [[Category:European Union organisations based in Luxembourg]]
-[[Category:Prosecution]]
+[[Category:Prosecution services]]

v t e Judiciary and law of the European Union
Judiciary	Court of Justice of the European Union European Court of Justice members Advocates General General Court Civil Service Tribunal European lawyer Relationship with ECHR Public Prosecutor European civil code
Treaties	Rome Treaty Merger Treaty Single European Act Maastricht Treaty Amsterdam Treaty Nice Treaty Lisbon Treaty Charter of Fundamental Rights Opt-outs
Acts	Acquis: Regulation Directive Framework Directive Decision Recommendation Digital Services Act
Procedures	Ordinary legislative procedure Consultation procedure Consent procedure Commission and Council acting alone Commission acting alone
Principles and terms	Acquis communautaire EUR-Lex Direct applicability Direct effect European labour law European Enforcement Order Gold-plating Four freedoms Home state regulation Indirect effect Incidental effect Minimum harmonisation Maximum harmonisation Preliminary ruling Precautionary principle Principle of legal certainty Recasting Principle of conferral Proportionality Staatenverbund State liability Subsidiarity Supremacy
Regulations	Council Regulation (EC) No. 1206/2001 Council Regulation (EC) No. 1348/2000 Customs Regulation 1383/2003 Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 EU-Eco-regulation Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2257/94 Commission Regulation (EU) No. 1170/2011 Customs Regulation 3295/94 Regulation on roaming charges Brussels Regime CLP Regulation Regulation on Community designs Societas Europaea European Union System for the Evaluation of Substances Commission Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 REACH Rome II Regulation Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation
Directives	Good Clinical Practice Directive Data Protection Directive ATEX directive Battery Directive Best available technology Biocidal Products Directive Birds Directive Capital Requirements Directives Clinical Trials Directive Computer Programs Directive Conditional Access Directive Copyright Duration Directive (93/98/EEC) Copyright Term Directive (2006/116/EC) Cosmetics Directive Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC) Dangerous Preparations Directive Data Retention Directive Database Directive Database right Directive 2000/43/EC on Anti-discrimination Directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation Information Society Directive (first Copyright directive) Directive on Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive on the Promotion of the use of biofuels and other renewable fuels for transport Directive on the re-use of public sector information Directive on Electricity Production from Renewable Energy Sources End of Life Vehicles Directive CHP Directive Directive on the energy performance of buildings Directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights Directive 2004/38/EC on the right to move and reside freely Environmental liability directive European SEA Directive 2001/42/EC European units of measurement directives Habitats Directive Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Internal Market in Electricity Directive Landfill Directive Directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions Directive on the legal protection of designs Markets in Financial Instruments Directive Measuring Instruments Directive Medical Devices Directive Posted Workers Directive Pressure Equipment Directive Rental Directive Resale Rights Directive Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive Satellite and Cable Directive Directive on services in the internal market Temporary and Agency Work Directive Trade Marks Directive European Directive on Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products Unfair Commercial Practices Directive Universal Service Directive Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive Waste Incineration Directive Waste framework directive Water Framework Directive Working Time Directive
Cases	ECJ Rulings (Caselex): Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College Apostolides v Orams Bosman Cassis de Dijon Chacón Navas v Eurest Colectividades SA Chen Ciarán Tobin Coleman v Attridge Law Costa v ENEL Factortame Francovich Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd Kolpak Microsoft Corp. v. Commission Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA Metock Nordsee Palacios de la Villa v Cortefiel Servicios SA Peter Paul and Others v Bundesrepublik Deutschland Procureur du Roi v Dassonville Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent und Markenamt Tanja Kreil Van Duyn v Home Office Van Gend en Loos
Fraud	Court of Auditors European Anti-Fraud Office Accountability in the European Union
European Union portal Law portal