The fact that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is provided for in the Lisbon Treaty is undoubtedly a very important step. At the same time, Art. 86 TFEU is one of the most delicate provisions of the new Treaty. It is sensitive both from a political and a legal point of view: the establishment of the EPPO – both because of its strong symbolic value and because of the potential powers it may have – clearly challenges Member States’ sovereignty and the powers, institutional organisation and realistic aspirations of existing EU criminal justice bodies. On the other hand, from the legal point of view, its implementation raises a list of questions without straightforward answers. The present article shall start with a brief overview of the legal confines of Art. 86 TFEU and the policy debates linked to it. So far four models were suggested for establishing the EPPO. These models will be analysed with the aim to determine the rules applicable to the procedure of the future EPPO. Special attention will be paid to the advocated role of mutual recognition. Based on the preliminary findings of the comparative study on the “EU model rules of criminal investigation and prosecution for the procedure of the proposed European Public Prosecutor’s Office”1 conducted by the author, it will be argued that the EPPO may rely on mutual recognition only to a limited extent.
1. Confines