Összefoglalás. A bűnügyi együttműködés joga jelentős fejlődésen ment keresztül az uniós tagállamok egymás közötti viszonyaiban az integráció utóbbi 25 évében. Legfőbb jellemzője e fejlődésnek az együttműködési formák „eljogiasodása” és formalizálása, valamint genuin, új uniós jogintézmények megszületése, amely a tagállamok kölcsönös bizalmán alapul. A közel-keleti országokkal való együttműködés szükségessége egyre nyilvánvalóbb, azonban az ezekre a viszonyokra vonatkozó jogszabályi háttér nem létezik, vagy legfeljebb minimális, ami az egyén – akit érinthet az államok közötti bűnügyi együttműködési eljárás – számára e lehető legnagyobb biztonsági kockázatot hordozza. A tanulmány feltérképezi azokat a hatásokat, amelyek az uniós fejlődésből a harmadik államokkal való együttműködésre vonatkoznak (extraterritoriális hatások), és kimutatja, hogy az uniós jog többletkövetelményeket támaszt a tagállamok felé még ilyen, az uniós jog hatálya alá (látszólag) nem tartozó kérdésekben. Kitér a munka arra is, hogy az Európa Tanács jogfejlesztő tevékenységének hol van a helye ezen a spektrumon, valamint arra is, hogy az ENSZ bűnözéskontroll egyezményei miként játszhatnak szerepet a jelen témakörben.

Summary. For centuries, the issue of judicial cooperation has been part of the foreign policy of the state as a means of promoting the political interests of the rulers (governments) and its actual judicial or legal content could not be identified. Cooperation between law enforcement and judicial authorities of different countries is therefore the oldest form of action against internationally ‘mobile’ offenders or crimes of transnational nature. The original aim was to prevent the perpetrator from escaping prosecution, and cooperation was therefore exercised against the interests of the person concerned. It was only in the second half of the 20th century that academia recognised that a person involved in extradition proceedings (and any other form of international criminal cooperation) may have individual rights and interests that are separate from those of the state. Thus, the individual (accused, victim, witness) emerges as a third actor in the context of cooperation between two states – based on international law and sovereignty – and, especially with the firm establishment of human rights protection regimes, also takes a place in these proceedings. Thus, international cooperation now involves three interests: the State requesting assistance, the State providing assistance and the person concerned. The law on cooperation in criminal matters has evolved considerably in the EU Member States’ relations with each other over the last 25 years of integration and pursues new paths that are completely divorced from traditional thinking as described above. The main feature of this development is the ‘juridification’ and formalisation of forms of cooperation and the emergence of genuine new EU legal institutions based on mutual trust between Member States. The need for cooperation with the countries of the Middle East and North Africa is becoming increasingly apparent, but the legal framework for these relations is non-existent or minimal at best, which poses the greatest possible security risk for the individual who may be affected by the inter-state cooperation procedures in criminal matters. The study explores the implications of EU developments for cooperation with third states (extraterritorial effects) and shows that EU law imposes additional requirements on Member States even in such matters as they can be covered by EU law. Accordingly, the inter-state horizontal impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the extraterritorial impact of EU crime control instruments and the explicit agreements on criminal cooperation are briefly discussed. The work also discusses the place of the Council of Europe’s law development activities in this spectrum: the European human rights protection, in particular with regard to extradition, entails additional requirements that Member States must comply with even when cooperating with a state outside the Council of Europe. Furthermore the role of the UN conventions on crime control is addressed by the study briefly.