8 / 69
The preventive role of the judiciary in protecting the financial interest of the European Union.
A comparative analysis for improved performance
6
When applying only the main sanctions, it rests on the administrative bodies to verify the accuracy of the
statutory declaration regarding the existence or not of a final ruling that disqualifies the bidder in the
context of a public procurement. In this context the exclusion remains an administrative sanction.
Whereas when the exclusion is used as a criminal sanction, it has a more assertive and dissuasive role. It
can also be used to establish public data bases, thus facilitating administrative control.
Also on the short run, the project will generate a set of recommendations in order to improve the actual
judicial practice and the application of accessory penalties. As they will be the result of a consultative
process with judicial officials they are likely to be easier assumed by the judiciary as a whole, or to
generate peer to peer pressure to enhance the protection of the financial interests of the Union through
judicial sanctions.
On the medium to long run, consistent application of the criminal sanctions for illegal activities affecting
the financial interests of the Union, as well as consistent application of the accessory penalties, which
can seriously limit the economic activities and affect the profitability of a business, may bring a real
deterrence effect for future criminal activities, both to the convicted ones and third parties. As such the
judiciary strengthen its role not only in sanctioning fraud, but also in preventing similar fraud to happen,
thus consolidating its role in protecting the financial interests of the Union.