Translation of "aboutir à la condamnation " (French → English) :

1. Each Member State shall ensure that in the course of criminal proceedings against a person, previous convictions handed down against the same person for different facts in other Member States, in respect of which information has been obtained under applicable instruments on mutual legal assistance or on the exchange of information extracted from criminal records, are taken into account to the extent previous national convictions are taken into account, and that equivalent legal effects are attached to them as to previous national convictions, in accordance with national law.

Today, in the post-charter era, we know that in all likelihood the reverse onus is unconstitutional because it could result in a conviction despite the existence of a reasonable doubt about the accused person's innocence.

This is not some contest to make a maximum number of arrests leading to charges, particularly if these charges are the result of bungled investigations.

A transfer may be made under the Convention only on the following conditions (Article 3): a) if that person is a national of the administering State; b) if the judgment is final; c) if, at the time of receipt of the request for transfer, the sentenced person still has at least six months of the sentence to serve or if the sentence is indeterminate; d) if the transfer is consented to by the sentenced person or, where in view of his age or his physical or mental condition one of the two States considers it necessary, by the sentenced person's legal representative; e) if the acts or omissions on account of which the sentence has been im ...[+++]posed constitute a criminal offence according to the law of the administering State or would constitute a criminal offence if committed on its territory; and f) if the sentencing and administering States agree to the transfer.

According to the Convention, the sentencing State may request another Contracting State to enforce a sentence only if one or more of the conditions set out in Article 5 are fulfilled, namely: (a) if the sentenced person is ordinarily resident in the other State; (b) if the enforcement of the sentence in the other State is likely to improve the prospects for the social rehabilitation of the sentenced person; (c) if, in the case of a sentence involving deprivation of liberty, the sentence could be enforced following the enforcement of another sentence involving deprivation of liberty which the sentenced person is undergoing or is to unde ...[+++]rgo in the other State; (d) if the other State is the State of origin of the sentenced person and has declared itself willing to accept responsibility for the enforcement of that sentence; or (e) if it considers that it cannot itself enforce the sentence, even by having recourse to extradition, and that the other State can. In addition, the judgment handed down in the requesting State must be final and enforceable and the offence in respect of which the sentence has been passed must also constitute an offence under the law of the requested State ("double criminality" requirement [76]).

-The offender must not constitute a threat to the public (Germany) or there must be no counter-arguments based on a serious risk for society (Belgium); this condition is evaluated on the basis of the following criteria: possibilities for reintegrating the offender (Belgium), offender's personality (Belgium, Germany), offender's conduct during detention (Belgium, Spain, Finland, Greece, Italy), risk that offender will re-offend (Belgium, Germany), offender's attitude to victims (Belgium), seriousness of offence (Germany).