The practice of “direct videoconferences” for the taking of testimonial evidence in cross-border cases
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2681Keywords:
Direct videoconferences, Judicial cooperation, European Investigation OrderAbstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, European States developed a practice of conducting cross-border videoconference hearings concerning individuals located abroad without the involvement of the judicial authority of the State in which they were present. These so-called “direct videoconferences” allow the trial State to contact the defendant, expert or witness in the absence of an EIO or MLA request, relying solely on their consent. The practice was discussed in the European Judicial Network and referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union in cases C-255/23 and C-285/23. It was later addressed by the Council of the European Union in evaluating Member States’ implementation of the EIO Directive. Legislative initiatives within the broader European legal framework have also raised questions regarding its legitimacy. This article examines the compatibility of direct videoconferences with the principle of territorial sovereignty and fundamental rights, arguing that procedural forms governing cross-border evidence gathering are essential safeguards of fairness and procedural integrity, rather than mere formalities.
Downloads
Metrics
Global Statistics ℹ️
|
29
Views
|
10
Downloads
|
|
39
Total
|
|
References
Adam, R., and Tizzano, A., 2024. Manuale di diritto dell’Unione europea. Turin: Giappichelli.
Bachmaier Winter, L., 2025. Mutual recognition and procedural safeguards at the light of cross-border criminal evidence: a difficult cohabitation, or a fun and interesting challenge? In: M. Bolognari et al., eds., I paradigmi di un processo penale in un mondo in trasformazione. Atti del Convegno in onore di Roberto E. Kostoris. Turin: Giappichelli, 177 ff.
Bolognari, M., 2022. Le videoconferenze transnazionali nell’ordine europeo di indagine. Rivista di Diritto Processuale, 2, 513 ff.
Bolognari, M., 2023. Il nuovo volto del dibattimento tra depotenziamento del contraddittorio e rinnovato ruolo dirigistico del giudice. Discrimen [online], 12, 6 ff. Available at: https://discrimen.it/wp-content/uploads/Bolognari-Il-nuovo-volto-del-dibattimento.pdf.
Brodowski, D., and Szabó, J., 2024. Transnational virtual criminal trial in the European Union: Reflections on occasion of joined cases C-255/23 (AVVA and Others) and C-285/23 (Linte) at the CJEU. Eucrim [online], 19(3). Available at: https://doi.org/10.30709/eucrim-2024-017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30709/eucrim-2024-017
Bueno Benedí, M., 2023. Videoconferencia y juicios telemáticos. Madrid: La Ley.
Bundesgerichtshof, 2022. BGH 5 StR 457/21 - Beschluss vom 2. März 2022 (LG Hamburg) [online]. Available at: https://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=2022&nr=127966.
Consejo General del Poder Judicial, 2020. Guía para la celebración de actuaciones judiciales telemáticas [online]. Available at: https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/En-Portada/La-Comision-Permanente-aprueba-una-Guia-para-la-celebracion-de-actuaciones-judiciales-telematicas
Council Decision (EU) 2023/436 of 14 February 2023 authorising Member States to ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced cooperation and disclosure of electronic evidence. Official Journal of the European Union [online], 28.2.2023, L 63/48. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2023/436/oj/eng.
Council of the European Union, 2021. Conclusion of the 57th Plenary Meeting of the European Judicial Network (EJN) Hearing by videoconference without the involvement of the executing Member State (Slovenia, 18-19 October 2021), 14448/21. Brussels, 2 December.
Council of the European Union, 2023a. Evaluation report on the tenth round of mutual evaluations on the implementation of the European Investigation Order (EIO) — Report on Lithuania, 16308/1/23 [online]. Brussels, 20 December, 36. Available at: https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVII/EU/167677/imfname_11325732.pdf.
Council of the European Union, 2023b. Evaluation report on the tenth round of mutual evaluations on the implementation of the European Investigation Order (EIO) — Report on Finland, 14604/1/23 [online]. Brussels, 8 December, 35. Available at: https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVII/EU/166093/imfname_11320938.pdf.
Council of the European Union, 2024a. Evaluation report on the tenth round of mutual evaluations on the implementation of the European Investigation Order (EIO) — Report on Estonia, 8475/1/24 [online]. Brussels, 21 May, 48. Available at: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8475-2024-REV-1/en/pdf%20.
Council of the European Union, 2024b. Final report on the tenth round of mutual evaluations on the implementation of the European Investigation Order (EIO), 15834/24 [online]. Brussels, 10 December. Available at: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15834-2024-REV-1/en/pdf.
Court of Justice of the European Union, 26.11.2002, Case C-100/01 (Oteiza Olazaval), § 43, ECLI:EU:C:2002:712.
Court of Justice of the European Union, 6.6.2024, joined Cases C-285/23 (Linte) and C-255/23 (AVVA and Others), ECLI:EU:C:2024:462.
Daniele, M., 2012. La formazione digitale delle prove dichiarative: l’esame a distanza tra regole interne e diritto sovranazionale. Turin: Giappichelli.
Dei-Cas, E., 2023. La partecipazione “parzialmente smaterializzata”: il grimaldello del consenso a favore dell’economia processuale. La legislazione penale, 24.4.2023.
Demenko, A., 2026. Criminal jurisdiction to prescribe and the “place of conduct” in transnational remote hearings. Oñati Socio-legal Series [online]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2665 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2665
Di Bitonto, M. L., and Cascone, G., 2024. La materialità minima e insopprimibile del procedimento penale. Cassazione Penale, 12, 4080 ff.
European Commission, 2026. Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters and the European Remote Participation Order, Brussels, 23.6.2026, COM(2026) 313 final [online]. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:8f135199-6f0a-11f1-ae88-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF.
European Court of Human Rights, 2.11.2010, Sakhnovskiy v. Russia.
European Court of Human Rights, 27.11.2007, Asciutto v. Italy.
European Court of Human Rights, 5.10.2006, Viola v. Italy.
Explanatory Report to the Convention of 29 May 2000 on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union [online], 29.12.2000, C 379/7. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:42000Y1229(02).
Explanatory Report to the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co-operation and disclosure of electronic evidence, CETS [online], No. 224, Strasbourg, 12.5.2022. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/1680a49c9d.
Galgani, B., 2024. La “trasmigrazione” delle attività di udienza nello spazio online: un presente in costante movimento e un futuro tutto da disegnare. In: A. Cappuccio and S. Ruggeri, eds., Antichi e nuovi modelli di giustizia partecipata e cultura della giurisdizione. Verso una tutela penale più umana ed egualitaria. Milan: Wolters Kluwer Cedam, 161 ff.
Kostoris R. E., 2018b. Ordine di investigazione europeo e tutela dei diritti fondamentali. Cassazione Penale, 5, 1437 ff.
Kostoris, R. E., 2018a. L’OEI nella dissolvenza tra regole e principi. In: M. Daniele and R. E. Kostoris, eds., L’ordine europeo di indagine penale: il nuovo volto della raccolta transnazionale delle prove nel d.lgs. n. 108 del 2017. Turin: Giappichelli, 3 ff.
La Rocca, N., 2024. L’accertamento della volontà dell’imputato nelle rinunce al contraddittorio. Milan: Wolters Kluwer Cedam.
Laro González, E., 2025a. La declaración del acusado por videoconferencia en el ámbito de la cooperación judicial penal, a propósito de la cuestión prejudicial C-285/23. In: H. Soleto Muñoz et al., eds., Estudios jurídicos en homenaje al profesor Víctor Moreno Catena, Vol. 3. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, 3283 ff.
Laro González, E., 2025b. La declaración por videoconferencia en materia penal desde la perspectiva europea y española. Revista de Estudios Europeos, 85, 150 ff. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24197/ree.85.2025.150-170
Livi, S. M., 2025. La fisionomia del dibattimento tra calendarizzazione, atti a distanza e videoregistrazioni. In: A. Gaito and O. Mazza, eds., Le riforme del processo penale: problemi operativi da Cartabia a Nordio. Milan: Giuffrè, 215 ff.
Maurer, M., and Leitner, S., 2025. D2.1 SimpliVi recommendations & best practices. Deliverable name: Recommendations for simplifying cross-border judicial videoconferencing [online], 8 ff. Available at: https://www.simplivi.eu/sites/default/files/2025-09/D2.1%20SimpliVi%20Recommendations%20v1.0.pdf.
Morán Martínez, R. A., 2021. Dictamen 1/21 sobre el uso de la videoconferencia en la cooperación judicial internacional en materia penal. Fiscalía General del Estado, Unidad de Cooperación Internacional, Fiscal de Sala.
Murro, O., 2022. La disciplina della videoconferenza per le dichiarazioni del testimone e dell’esperto. Diritto Penale e Processo, n. 9, 1143 ff.
Negri, D., 2018. La gigantesca espansione della videoconferenza come alternativa alla presenza fisica dell’imputato al giudizio. Archivio Penale, Supplement No. 1, La giustizia penale riformata, 567 ff.
Negri, D., 2023. Atti e udienze “a distanza”: risvolti inquisitori di una transizione maldestra alla giustizia digitale. In: D. Castronuovo et al., eds., Riforma Cartabia: la nuova giustizia penale. Milan: Wolters Kluwer Cedam, 449 ff.
Nobili, M., 1974. Il principio del libero convincimento del giudice. Milan: Giuffrè.
Pascucci, N., 2025. L’esame a distanza di testimoni, periti e consulenti tecnici in dibattimento. Milan: Wolters Kluwer Cedam.
Pascucci, N., 2026. L’esame testimoniale a distanza nel sistema della “grande Europa”. La legislazione penale, 8.7.2026.
Proposal for a Council decision authorising Member States to sign, in the interest of the European Union, the Third Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, Brussels, 17.9.2025, COM(2025) 510 final [online]. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0510.
Salerno, F., 2024. Diritto internazionale: principi e norme. Milan: Wolters Kluwer Cedam.
Tognazzi, S., 2021. Criminalità informatica e cooperazione internazionale: verso il Secondo Protocollo addizionale alla Convenzione di Budapest. In: L. Algeri et al., eds., Nuove tecnologie e processo penale. Milan: Wolters Kluwer Cedam, 76 ff.
Tronchin, N., 2024. L’importante è partecipare? Considerazioni sull’imputato in videoconferenza alla luce del rinvio pregiudiziale nella causa C-760/22. L’Indice Penale, 3, 61 ff.
Tronchin, N., 2026. I due volti della videoconferenza nella cooperazione giudiziaria tra Stati membri. La legislazione penale, 3.6.2026.
Wahl, T., 2022. Germany: Federal Court of Justice confirms use of evidence in EncroChat Case. Eucrim [online], 17(1). Available at: https://eucrim.eu/news/germany-federal-court-of-justice-confirms-use-of-evidence-in-encrochat-cases/.
Žukovaitė, I., 2024. Remote criminal proceedings in EU law from the perspective of strengthening the rights of the accused. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics [online], 17(2), 77 ff. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2024-00016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2024-00016
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Niccolò Tronchin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence and it regulates how others can use your work. Further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
Funding data
-
NextGenerationEU
Grant numbers F53D23012050001
