Marianne Wade and Almir Maljevi? Although the worries about terrorism paled in comparison to the economic crisis as a topic during the last US election, one can find plenty of grounds to assume that they remain issue number one in the minds of politicians in Europe. As the German houses of Parliament prepare to call in the mediation committee in the discussion of legislation which would provide the Federal Police - thus far mandated purely with the post-facto investigation of crime - with powers to act to prevent acts of terrorism, Spain's struggle with ETA and the British Government licks its wounds after a resounding defeat of its latest anti-terrorist proposals by the House of Lords, one cannot but wonder whether post 9/11, the Europeans are not even more concerned with terrorism than their US counterparts. A look at media reports, legislative and judicial activities in either Britain or Germany clearly underlines that those two countries are deeply embroiled in anti-terrorist activity. Can it be that Europe is embroiled in the "War on Terror"; constantly providing for new arms in this conflict? Or is it a refusal to participate in the "War on Terror" that fuels a constant need for Parliaments to grapple with the subject; begrudgingly conceding one increasingly draconian measure after the other? The question as to where Europe stands in the "War on Terror" is a fascinating one, but one, which is difficult to answer.

Heightened crime rates across Europe have led to increased workloads for police, prosecution and courts systems and resources have not risen in line. Each country has coped with this mismatch of workload and resources in its own way and in most cases the practices and powers of each of the agencies involved have needed to be changed as a reaction to this.

This book describes the results of a six-nation study of how criminal justice agencies in England and Wales, France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden have reacted to high crime rates and punitiveness. It shows how various solutions have been found, involving diversion of cases from courts, increases in financial penalties imposed by police or prosecutors without full court hearings and the introduction in some countries of "administrative offences."

The book reveals the fast-moving and far reaching changes that are now in process involving wide-scale changes to the way justice is being delivered throughout the EU.

Heightened crime rates across Europe have led to increased workloads for police, prosecution and courts systems and resources have not risen in line. Each country has coped with this mismatch of workload and resources in its own way and in most cases the practices and powers of each of the agencies involved have needed to be changed as a reaction to this.

This book describes the results of a six-nation study of how criminal justice agencies in England and Wales, France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden have reacted to high crime rates and punitiveness. It shows how various solutions have been found, involving diversion of cases from courts, increases in financial penalties imposed by police or prosecutors without full court hearings and the introduction in some countries of "administrative offences."

The book reveals the fast-moving and far reaching changes that are now in process involving wide-scale changes to the way justice is being delivered throughout the EU.

The American prosecutor plays a powerful role in the judicial system, wielding the authority to accept or decline a case, choose which crimes to allege, and decide the number of counts to charge. These choices, among others, are often made with little supervision or institutional oversight. This prosecutorial discretion has prompted scholars to look to the role of prosecutors in Europe for insight on how to reform the American system of justice.
In The Prosecutor in Transnational Perspective, Erik Luna and Marianne Wade, through the works of their contributors coupled with their own analysis, demonstrate that valuable lessons can be learned from a transnational examination of prosecutorial authority. They examine both parallels and distinctions in the processes available to and decisions made by prosecutors in the United States and Europe. Ultimately, they demonstrate how the enhanced role of the prosecutor represents a crossroads for criminal justice with weighty legal and socio-economic consequences.

Marianne Wade and Almir Maljevi? Although the worries about terrorism paled in comparison to the economic crisis as a topic during the last US election, one can find plenty of grounds to assume that they remain issue number one in the minds of politicians in Europe. As the German houses of Parliament prepare to call in the mediation committee in the discussion of legislation which would provide the Federal Police - thus far mandated purely with the post-facto investigation of crime - with powers to act to prevent acts of terrorism, Spain's struggle with ETA and the British Government licks its wounds after a resounding defeat of its latest anti-terrorist proposals by the House of Lords, one cannot but wonder whether post 9/11, the Europeans are not even more concerned with terrorism than their US counterparts. A look at media reports, legislative and judicial activities in either Britain or Germany clearly underlines that those two countries are deeply embroiled in anti-terrorist activity. Can it be that Europe is embroiled in the "War on Terror"; constantly providing for new arms in this conflict? Or is it a refusal to participate in the "War on Terror" that fuels a constant need for Parliaments to grapple with the subject; begrudgingly conceding one increasingly draconian measure after the other? The question as to where Europe stands in the "War on Terror" is a fascinating one, but one, which is difficult to answer.