L 123/20
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
10.5.2019
offence, at least when it involves the commission of one of the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 6 of Directive
2013/40/EU or the misappropriation of a non-corporeal non-cash payment instrument. ‘Misappropriation’
should be understood to mean the action of a person entrusted with a non-corporeal non-cash payment
instrument, to knowingly use the instrument without the right to do so, to his own benefit or to the benefit of
another. The procurement for fraudulent use of such an unlawfully obtained instrument should be punishable
without it being necessary to establish all the factual elements of the unlawful obtainment and without requiring
a prior or simultaneous conviction for the predicate offence which led to the unlawful obtainment.
(16)
This Directive also refers to tools which can be used in order to commit the offences referred to in it. Given the
need to avoid criminalisation where such tools are produced and placed on the market for legitimate purposes
and, though they could be used to commit criminal offences, are therefore not in themselves a threat, criminali
sation should be limited to those tools which are primarily designed or specifically adapted for the purpose of
committing the offences referred to in this Directive.
(17)
The sanctions and penalties for fraud and counterfeiting of non-cash means of payment should be effective,
proportionate and dissuasive throughout the Union. This Directive is without prejudice to the individualisation
and application of penalties and execution of sentences in accordance with the circumstances of the case and the
general rules of national criminal law.
(18)
As this Directive provides for minimum rules, Member States are free to adopt or maintain more stringent
criminal law rules with regard to fraud and counterfeiting of non-cash means of payment, including a broader
definition of offences.
(19)
It is appropriate to provide for more severe penalties where a crime is committed in the framework of a criminal
organisation, as defined in Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA (5). Member States should not be obliged
to provide for specific aggravating circumstances where national law provides for separate criminal offences and
this may lead to more severe sanctions. When an offence referred to in this Directive has been committed in
conjunction with another offence referred to in this Directive by the same person, and one of those offences de
facto constitutes a necessary element of the other, a Member State may, in accordance with general principles of
national law, provide that such conduct is regarded as an aggravating circumstance to the main offence.
(20)
Jurisdictional rules should ensure that the offences referred to in this Directive are prosecuted effectively. In
general, offences are best dealt with by the criminal justice system of the country in which they occur. Each
Member State should therefore establish jurisdiction over offences committed on its territory and over offences
committed by its nationals. Member States may also establish jurisdiction over offences that cause damage in
their territory. They are strongly encouraged to do so.
(21)
Recalling the obligations under Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA (6) and Council Decision
2002/187/JHA (7), competent authorities are encouraged in cases of conflicts of jurisdiction to use the possibility
of conducting direct consultations with the assistance of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice
Cooperation (Eurojust).
(22)
Given the need for special tools to effectively investigate fraud and counterfeiting of non-cash means of payment,
and their relevance to effective international cooperation between national authorities, investigative tools that are
typically used for cases involving organised crime or other serious crime should be available to competent
authorities in all Member States, if and to the extent that the use of those tools is appropriate and commensurate
with the nature and gravity of the offences as defined in national law. In addition, law enforcement authorities
and other competent authorities should have timely access to relevant information in order to investigate and
prosecute the offences referred to in this Directive. Member States are encouraged to allocate adequate human
and financial resources to the competent authorities in order to properly investigate and prosecute the offences
referred to in this Directive.
(5) Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42).
(6) Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction
in criminal proceedings (OJ L 328, 15.12.2009, p. 42).
(7) Council Decision 2002/187/JHA of 28 February 2002 setting up Eurojust with a view to reinforcing the fight against serious crime
(OJ L 63, 6.3.2002, p. 1).