Translation of "loi sur les poursuites sommaires " (French → English) :

In view of the analysis, the Commission asked Member States to report on "Existing national law establishing as a criminal offence the use of services which are the objects of exploitation of trafficking in human beings; who is precisely criminalised; if criminalisation for all forms of exploitation is envisaged; if legislation requires proving the element of knowledge that the person is a victim of trafficking and how it impacts the applicability of the legislation; what measures were taken to ensure that the public is aware of the law to ensure better implementation; available statistical data on prosecutions and convictions and h ...[+++]urdles faced; if there is no existing national law, what are the reasons and what alternatives are in place to fulfil the obligation of considering criminalisation; how they assess the impact of such laws and if they have relevant suggestions; what consultation processes are in place and; if they have commissioned any evaluation and research of such laws".

[77] 7 Grounds for refusal: (a) where enforcement would run counter to the fundamental principles of the legal system of the requested State; (b) where the requested State considers the offence for which the sentence was passed to be of a political nature or a purely military one; (c) where the requested State considers that there are substantial grounds for believing that the sentence was brought about or aggravated by considerations of race, religion, nationality or political opinion; (d) where enforcement would be contrary to the international undertakings of the requested State; (e) where the act is already the subject of proceedings in the requested State or where the requested State decides to institute proceedings in respect of t ...[+++]he act; (f) where the competent authorities in the requested State have decided not to take proceedings or to drop proceedings already begun, in respect of the same act; (g) where the act was committed outside the territory of the requesting State; (h) where the requested State is unable to enforce the sentence; (i) where the request is grounded on Article 5.e ("if it considers that it cannot itself enforce the sanction, even by having recourse to extradition, and that the other State can") and none of the other conditions mentioned in that article is fulfilled; (j) where the requested State considers that the requesting State is itself able to enforce the sentence; (k) where the age of the sentenced person at the time of the offence was such that he could not have been prosecuted in the requested State; (l) where under the law of the requested State the sentence imposed can no longer be enforced because of the lapse of time; (m) where and to the extent that the sentence imposes a disqualification.

In Luxembourg, the Act of 6 May 1999 incorporated a fifth paragraph into Article 24 of the Criminal Code, under which, before bringing proceedings, the prosecutor may have recourse to mediation, which may lead to a decision to continue with the proceedings or to allow the criminal action to lapse.

By point 2(d) of the second subparagraph of Article III-171(1) of the Draft Constitution, European laws or framework laws shall establish measures to "facilitate cooperation between judicial or equivalent authorities of the Member States in relation to proceedings in criminal matters and the enforcement of decisions".

They clearly have sections that outline an offence that perhaps then could be proceeded with in regular provincial court and then opens up all the available remedies that are under the Criminal Code under the Summary Convictions Act.

Although contempt proceedings under the bill would be summary in nature, under clauses 37(2) and (3) an appeal of a conviction or sentence for contempt imposed by a youth justice court would be dealt with as an appeal in a case prosecuted by indictment.