The European Union and wildlife trafficking

Article 16 of Regulation 338/97 requires Member States to fix sanctions for thirteen infringements of the Regulation. These sanctions must be appropriate to the nature and gravity of the infringement and shall include provisions on the seizure and confiscation of specimens. Whether sanctions are of criminal, administrative or civil nature is left to each Member State to decide.

Under Articles 3(g) and 5 of Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of the environment through criminal law, Member States shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal sanctions for cases concerning the illegal "trading in specimens of protected wild fauna or flora species or parts or derivatives thereof, except for cases where the conduct concerns a negligible quantity of such specimens and has a negligible impact on the conservation status of the species".

Whether Member States comply with these provisions and whether indeed the (criminal) sanctions are effective, proportionate and dissuasive, is not known. The Commission apparently never compared the sanctions that were fixed at Member State level or undertook research as to their effectiveness. Police and customs authorities sometimes complain that illegal wildlife trade is not sanctioned appropriately; in the absence of any reliable factual data, such arguments cannot be verified.

Role of a Judge / Prosecutor and Administrative versus Criminal Procedures
Dr Matthias Keller & Dr Matthias Quarch