Europol, joint teams and what they can actually do
People arrested in a cross-border drug case are frequently told that Europol is investigating them. Europol does not investigate anyone in that sense: it has no executive powers, cannot arrest, cannot search and cannot compel the production of anything. It analyses, it coordinates and it supports national authorities, which are the bodies that actually exercise coercive powers in every participating state.
That distinction matters to the defence rather than to the vocabulary. Establishing exactly what the supporting body did, what a joint team was set up to examine, which national law governed each investigative act and what has been disclosed in each state is where the real work lies. Where several states have an interest in the same conduct, the risk of being prosecuted more than once also has to be managed from the outset, and the person needs representation in each place that has opened a file.
Avv. Massimo Romano — Ordine degli Avvocati di Napoli n. 14553, patrocinante in Cassazione dal 23/10/2015 — Roma, Via Avicenna 97, 00146 · Milano, Via Giuseppe Pecchio 3, 20129 · Napoli, Corso Umberto I 237, 80138 — +39 335 669 3954
In brief
- The body that coordinates has no power to arrest, search or compel, so an accusation framed around its involvement describes support work rather than the exercise of any coercive power.
- Every arrest, search and seizure in these cases is carried out by national authorities, and it is their authorisations and records that the defence must obtain and test.
- A joint investigation team is created by agreement between participating states for a defined purpose and period, with officers taking part directly in another state's territory.
- Inside such a team material moves between the participating states without a formal request each time, which changes the questions the defence should be asking.
- The terms of the agreement matter: which states joined, what the team was set up to examine, what powers seconded officers held and whether material travelled beyond that purpose.
- Evidence gathered under the rules of one country and used under those of another is lawful in principle, but the method, the authorisation and the disclosure are all open to examination.
- The defence in each participating state is often given a different file, and reconciling what each has received frequently exposes gaps worth litigating.
- Where more than a single state is prosecuting the same conduct, the coordination body can be asked to resolve the conflict, and a final judgment in one member state has consequences for the others.
Who does what
| Body | Powers | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| Europol | Analysis, intelligence, coordination — no executive powers | It cannot arrest, search or compel |
| Eurojust | Coordination between prosecuting authorities | Resolves conflicts of jurisdiction |
| National authorities | All coercive powers | Every arrest and search is theirs |
| Joint investigation team | An agreement between two or more states | Evidence moves inside it directly |
| European Investigation Order | A request from one state to another | With limited grounds for refusal |
| Frontex | Border management support | Not a criminal investigation body |
The joint investigation team
A joint team is set up by agreement between two or more member states, for a defined purpose and period, with officers from each participating directly in the other's territory. Its practical effect is that information gathered in one state can be used in the other without a formal request each time.
For the defence that changes the questions. Instead of asking whether a request was properly executed, you ask what the agreement says: which states are parties, what the team was set up to investigate, what powers the seconded officers had, and whether material was shared beyond its scope.
- The agreement itself defines the scope and should be disclosed in substance.
- Which law applied to a given investigative act — that of the state where it took place.
- Whether the act would have been lawful in the state now using the evidence.
- Whether material travelled beyond the purpose for which the team was created.
- Whether the defence in each state has the same file, which it frequently does not.
Evidence obtained abroad
The recurring issue in these cases is material gathered under one country's rules and used under another's. That is lawful in principle, but it raises questions that are rarely asked and occasionally decisive: whether the method used would have been permitted here, whether authorisations existed, and what the defence has been given to test it.
The most litigated example in Europe remains the encrypted messaging platforms, where the underlying interception took place in one state and the material was used in dozens. The framework is in the guide on trafficking association charges and, on the transfer mechanisms, in the guide on cross-border investigations.
The bodies that appear in a cross-border file are routinely confused with each other, so the table separates what each can do from what it cannot.
| Body or instrument | What it can do | What it cannot do |
|---|---|---|
| The European police cooperation body | Analyse intelligence, match records and coordinate between national forces. | Arrest, search, interview under caution or compel production. |
| The judicial cooperation body | Coordinate prosecuting authorities and help resolve conflicts of jurisdiction. | Direct a national prosecutor or bring charges itself. |
| National police and prosecutors | Exercise every coercive power, from search to arrest to seizure. | Act outside their own territory without an agreement or a request. |
| A joint investigation team | Allow material to move directly between the participating states. | Operate beyond the purpose and the period stated in its agreement. |
| A cross-border investigation order | Oblige another member state to carry out a requested measure. | Be refused except on the limited grounds provided. |
| The border management agency | Support states at the external frontier. | Conduct a criminal investigation of its own. |
Being prosecuted in two of the participating states
Coordinated investigations regularly produce parallel proceedings, and a final decision in one member state can bar prosecution in another for the same acts. It has to be raised, with the foreign decision produced and translated, and the framework is in the guide on double prosecution.
Frequently asked questions
Is Europol investigating me?
Europol has no executive powers: it cannot arrest, search or compel. Every coercive act in your case was carried out by a national authority.
What is a joint investigation team?
An agreement between two or more states, for a defined purpose and period, allowing officers to participate directly and evidence to move without a formal request each time.
Evidence was gathered in another country.
That is lawful in principle, but whether the method would have been permitted here, and what the defence has been given to test it, are live questions.
Can I be prosecuted in two of the countries?
Not for the same acts once a final decision exists in one of them, but the point must be raised with the foreign decision produced and translated.
If several countries are involved
Establishing which authority did what, under which rules, is the first piece of work and it is rarely done. First contact is free and covered by professional privilege.
Who is told that Europol is behind the arrest
The sentence usually comes early, from an officer in a corridor or from a translator: this is a Europol operation. For the person who has just been arrested it sounds like the end of any argument. Relatives hear it on the phone from a lawyer in another country, or read it in a news item that lists several states, several arrests and a seizure. Some readers have been arrested in Italy after a consignment was followed across a border. Others are in a different country on an Italian warrant, or have learned that a co-suspect was arrested elsewhere and that their own name appears in the papers.
A growing number of readers arrive because their data came from an encrypted telephone service. Italian files in this area often refer to messages obtained from platforms that were infiltrated, and the person wants to know whether that material can be used, who obtained it and under what rules. Families want to know where the trial will be, which country will hold their relative and whether they should hire a lawyer in each.
The opening point worth knowing is also the most useful: the label does not describe a legal power. Europol analyses, coordinates and supports. It does not arrest, search or compel. Every coercive act was carried out by a national authority under its own law, and your defence will be built around which authority did what, when and with whose permission. This page explains how to ask those questions without losing the opening days.
Where a joint team exists, the agreement behind it is the document that governs everything, and the table lists what to ask about it and why each answer counts.
| Question to put | Why the answer matters |
|---|---|
| Which states are parties to the agreement | It determines where material could lawfully travel and who may prosecute. |
| What the team was set up to examine | Material gathered beyond that purpose is open to challenge in each state. |
| What powers the seconded officers held | An officer acting beyond those powers affects the validity of the act. |
| For what period the team existed | Acts outside the stated period do not benefit from the agreement. |
| What the defence has been given in each state | Divergent files usually reveal material that has not been disclosed anywhere. |
Decisions to make while several states have an interest in you
An arrest in a cross-border case puts you in front of choices that do not exist in a purely domestic file. Each has a price.
- Speaking before you know what the other states hold. Investigators in different countries share material, and a statement made to any authority can reach the others in translation. If you speak without seeing the file, you may contradict documents that are already elsewhere. Silence has a price too: the officers may present it as non-cooperation. Ask for a lawyer and for time to see what has been disclosed.
- Consenting to be sent to another state. Where a European arrest warrant is issued, a person may be asked whether they agree to surrender. Agreement can shorten the process; it also removes the chance to raise objections about the warrant, the conditions or the proportionality. Do not decide at the police station without advice from a lawyer who has read the warrant.
- Hiring lawyers in several states. It costs more and it requires coordination, but each defender knows his own system. A lone lawyer cannot properly argue about the rules of evidence in several jurisdictions.
- Challenging where the trial will take place. Sometimes the same facts are open in several countries. Raising the issue early can matter; raising it late may be too late.
The right order is nearly always to learn before deciding.
Papers and facts to gather when several countries are involved
Cross-border cases are won or lost on dates, documents and sequence. Start a record now and keep it organised by country.
- The arrest warrant or the order that authorised your detention, in the original language and with any translation you were given, photographed in full.
- The record of any search: the list of items taken, the place, the time, the officers present, and whether you were allowed to see a lawyer.
- A list of every device, account and messaging service you use or used, including names of applications, kept for your lawyer only.
- Travel evidence: tickets, border crossings, hotel invoices, fuel receipts and vehicle documents, with dates in the order they happened.
- Papers about the consignment or business at issue: contracts, invoices, transport documents and emails that show your role and your lack of any other.
- The names and contact details of any lawyer you have seen in each country and what each told you.
- Any previous judgment, charge or investigation in another state about related facts, with translations.
- Details of every statement you made, to whom, in what language and whether an interpreter was present.
Do not keep the list on a shared device or in an account that investigators could already reach. Ask each lawyer which of these papers they already hold, so that no request is repeated and nothing is missed.
What changes at home, at work and in the family when the case is international
A cross-border arrest can move a person far from the place where their life is. Detention in another country means a language that may not be yours, visiting rules you have never read and phone calls that cost a lot and cannot be made at the hour you want. Families cannot drop in. They must decide who goes, how to find lodging, how to make sure the visit is permitted and what to bring, and they will spend money before anybody knows how long the case will last.
Work and business suffer in ways that are hard to predict. Bank accounts, vehicles and company property may be frozen in a given state while an investigation continues in another. A driver or a logistics employee may lose a contract overnight, and an owner of a transport firm may find that customers have disappeared. A foreign resident in Italy whose permit depends on employment needs to tell the lawyer immediately, because absence can have consequences that nobody has thought about.
Relatives left at home face questions from schools, landlords and neighbours. A rumour that Europol is involved travels faster than the facts. Agree with the lawyer on what can be said, and by whom, so that nobody improvises an explanation that later contradicts the file.
Questions about the international side of the case
These are the questions that people with an international file tend not to think of, and the answers shape the strategy.
- Which authority actually ordered each arrest and search, and under which national rules was each of them carried out?
- Is there a joint investigation team in this case, and if so, what does the agreement between the states say about sharing evidence?
- How was the material from other countries obtained, and can its lawfulness be examined here?
- If the material came from an encrypted service, what is known about how it was collected and who has access to the technical details?
- Where is the case likely to be tried, and can I influence that?
- If I am surrendered to another state, what happens to my case here, and who defends me there?
- Will time spent in detention in a country be counted in another, and how is that recorded?
- Can I be questioned in a country about facts being investigated in another, and with which safeguards?
- Who coordinates with the foreign lawyers, and how do we avoid giving contradictory instructions?
Ask for the answers to be put in writing, because the details matter when counsel in different countries compare notes. Keep the written answers in the same folder as the arrest papers, in date order.
Evidence collected abroad is attacked on specific points rather than in general terms, and the table pairs each point with what has to be established and what follows if it is.
| Point of challenge | What has to be established | Effect if it is made out |
|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness in the state of collection | Which national law governed the act and whether it was complied with. | The material may be unusable where it is now relied on. |
| Authorisation for the measure | That a judicial or other required authorisation existed and covered the act. | Acts without cover fall away, together with what flowed from them. |
| Method of interception or extraction | How data was captured and whether the method would be permitted here. | The reliability and the admissibility of the data are both put in issue. |
| Disclosure to the defence | What was handed over and what was withheld as unavailable. | Material that cannot be tested carries reduced weight or none. |
| Attribution of an account or device | That the account, handset or message belongs to the accused. | Without attribution the content proves nothing against that person. |
Mistakes that are especially costly in a multi-state case
The following habits cause harm in domestic cases and more harm in international ones.
- Do not accept the label as a reason to give up. Hearing that an agency is involved is not evidence about you.
- Do not give different accounts to different authorities. They compare. Differences in detail, even innocent ones, are used as signs of unreliability.
- Do not discuss the case on the phone from custody. Calls are recorded, and recordings can be sent to other states.
- Do not ask relatives to contact co-suspects. Messages that look like coordination become evidence of an agreement.
- Do not wipe devices or accounts. Deletion is visible, and the material may already be held elsewhere.
- Do not sign a translation you cannot check. A statement is only as accurate as its interpreter. Ask for the original-language version to be kept.
- Do not travel to a state where you may be wanted without legal advice. A planned flight is not a safe plan.
- Do not post about the case. Social media posts are read by prosecutors in every state involved.
- Do not rely on a relative's guess about another country's law. Explanations passed along by friends of friends are usually wrong in detail, and decisions built on them are hard to reverse.
- Do not negotiate with investigators in another state through a relative. Informal contacts are not protected and are not recorded in your favour.
Working across borders: translation, post, time zones and consulates
Anybody who has tried to obtain a document from a foreign court knows the delays. A request that crosses a border passes through several offices, each with its own queue, and each document that arrives needs a translation that is precise enough to be used in a hearing. Ask early which papers are available in which language, and do not assume that the translation provided by the authorities is full or accurate.
Time zones affect urgent calls. A lawyer in another state may be reachable only in the morning of the other country, while a custody hearing in Italy can fall at an hour when that lawyer is asleep. Agree a communication routine at the outset: who calls whom, in which language and by what method, and what is done when a message is urgent.
Consulates can confirm that you are held, pass messages to relatives, supply lists of interpreters and lawyers, and monitor whether your treatment meets minimum standards. They do not choose a defence, discuss the evidence or ask a court to act. Relatives should contact the consulate of the state where you are held, and your own state's consulate in the other state, and keep a note of whom they spoke to. Where a prosecutor in a state asks another state for help, that request itself is a document worth obtaining.
How the firm coordinates when the case touches several states
Send the arrest documents and any paper you have seen by email or WhatsApp, with a short note of which countries are named. The lawyer will say within hours what can be done that day and who needs to be contacted. The telephone number is on this page and the email address is avvmassimoromano@gmail.com.
The opening call establishes the chronology: where you were arrested, by whom, in what language you were questioned, what you signed and what you said. The lawyer asks which lawyers you have already spoken to in other countries and whether any of them is in charge of a process there. From that conversation comes a plan of coordination, usually a simple arrangement: a shared timeline, an agreed channel with each foreign counsel, and a rule that no statement is given in any state until the others have been informed.
The firm works in English. Rome, Milan and Naples offices allow attendance at hearings in different parts of Italy, and the lawyer can travel when a transfer or a hearing requires it. For work abroad, correspondents are asked to join the defence for particular tasks, such as reading a foreign file or attending a hearing. The scope and fees of each task are agreed in writing, and the family receives short written updates after each step.
Terms on warrants, file copies and cooperation requests
Several of these words come from Italian files in the same area. Interpreters often translate them loosely.
- Europol — the European agency that supports national police with analysis and coordination. It holds no power to arrest or search.
- Eurojust — a body that helps prosecutors of different states coordinate and resolve conflicts about which country should proceed.
- Joint investigation team — an agreement between states to investigate together and share material, usually for a stated purpose and period.
- Coercive powers — the powers to arrest, search and compel, which belong only to national authorities.
- Rogatoria — a formal request from the authorities of a state to those of another for evidence or help. Italian papers refer to international requests of this kind.
- MAE — the Italian abbreviation for the European arrest warrant, the instrument used between Member States to send a person to another state.
- Judicial cooperation — the general term for the channels through which states exchange evidence and persons.
- Defence investigations — inquiries carried out on behalf of the accused by their own lawyer, which Italian procedure allows within limits.
If a term on your paper is not here, send it to the lawyer exactly as written. The same few words return in warrants, in letters between states and in copies of the file, so ask for each to be explained the earliest time it appears and keep a short glossary of your own.
About the lawyer
A relative detained abroad changes the shape of a family's day: nobody knows who to call first, and the information that does arrive is fragmentary. Avv. Massimo Romano works on Italian criminal matters, European arrest warrants and the position of Italians arrested outside Italy, and he is admitted to plead before the Court of Cassation. The office works from Rome, Milan and Naples, which matters when papers have to be filed in one city while the family lives in another. Contact usually begins with a telephone call or a WhatsApp message describing, in plain terms, what happened. He reads whatever paperwork exists before giving an opinion; if something is missing, he says what to ask for and who to ask. After that first conversation the family receives a written account of the position and the steps that follow. Discussions with relatives are held in the language they use at home.
Telephone the office or send a WhatsApp message. Before you call, gather the document you received, the name of the authority written on it, and the file reference if one appears.
Avv. Massimo Romano — criminal defence lawyer, admitted to the Italian Court of Cassation
Iscritto all'Ordine degli Avvocati di Napoli n. 14553 | Patrocinante in Cassazione dal 23/10/2015
Roma, Via Avicenna 97, 00146 · Milano, Via Giuseppe Pecchio 3, 20129 · Napoli, Corso Umberto I 237, 80138
+39 335 669 3954 · WhatsApp