The chapter explains the principles of inter-state cooperation in criminal matters in connection with domestic proceedings. It sets out the international legal framework governing criminal law cooperation among states, including multilateral and bilateral agreements of general application and treaties specifically concerning international crimes, most notably the 2023 Ljubljana–The Hague Convention on International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of the Crime of Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes. The chapter sets out the differences between the traditional forms of assistance in criminal matters, which are associated with a higher degree of formality and subject to broader grounds for refusal and, on the other hand, the more advanced forms of cooperation (exemplified by mutual recognition in the European Union context) prioritizing effective enforcement while recognizing limited grounds to refuse requests. The chapter reviews the prerogatives of the requested states to refuse under these models with reference to double criminality, specialty, statutory limitations, ne bis in idem, and human rights concerns. It then takes a closer look at the traditional forms of cooperation and the issues which arise in that context, focusing on extradition, other mutual legal assistance, transfer of criminal proceedings, and enforcement of foreign penalties.

The focus of this book is the uniform Evidence Act (referred to throughout as ‘the Act’ or ‘the Acts’). The Act has not been introduced in Queensland, South Australia or Western Australia, where each state’s Evidence Act and the common law apply. However, the Act is still an important reference guide for those states due to the connection between the common law and the Act. Despite the differences between jurisdictions that have adopted the Act, there is a significant degree of uniformity. Accordingly, in this book the provisions that are extracted to indicate the rules in relation to the Act come from the Commonwealth Act. Any important jurisdictional differences are separately identified.

This chapter considers the legislative history and sets out some fundamental introductory concepts that are used frequently in evidence law and the trial process. This chapter is merely an introductory overview; specific topics are dealt with in substance in subsequent chapters.

The final chapter of this text provides extended questions designed to test students' understanding and knowledge of evidence law as a whole. Each question combines multiple elements of the Uniform Evidence Act to ensure students understand how sections work together.

The need to make progress in the harmonisation of the rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings has become essential for the appropriate functioning of the principle of mutual recognition, laid down in Article 82 TFEU as the basis of judicial cooperation in criminal matters. This principle is founded on mutual confidence between the judicial authorities of Member States, according to which national legal systems are capable of providing equivalent and effective protection of the fundamental rights recognised at EU level, particularly in the Charter. Among these fundamental rights, the EU had to establish a common core of minimum standards protecting rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings. To this end and to implement the Stockholm Roadmap for strengthening procedural rights of suspected or accused persons in criminal proceedings, six directives have been adopted. They represent a reference point for procedural guarantees and should be regarded as an integral part of the protection afforded by Article 48(2) of the Charter. This chapter analyses the six directives, including the consequences of their adoption by EU institutions, the possible shortcomings experienced during their implementation in Member States, and the difficulties involved in their application by judicial authorities.