Cross-border Workshop for Law Enforcement Authorities (LEAs)_Event report

3–4 December 2025

Introduction

The Cross-border Workshop for Law Enforcement Authorities (LEAs), organized under Task T4.1, took place on 3-4 December, 2025, at the Academy of the Police Force in Bratislava. The event formed part of the Full-Proof Project (Work Package 4) focused on improving procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings and enhancing LEA practices during first interrogations. The aim of the workshop was to strengthen cross-border cooperation among law enforcement authorities, exchange experiences related to the implementation of procedural rights of suspects and accused persons, and discuss the transposition of relevant EU directives into national legal systems.

Participants

A total of 12 police officers took part in the workshop, representing various departments and ranks within the Slovak, Romania and Polish Police:

• 7 Police Officers from Slovakia - Daniela Sedláková, Andrea Babušáková, Michaela Nahálková, Alžbeta Farkašová, Katarína Marko, Miloš Zaujec, Zuzana Medelská Tkáčová
• 2 Police Officers from Poland - Paweł Tylman, Grzegorz Wawryszuk
• 3 Police Officers from Romania - Streulea Miruna-Ioana, Stoe Anca- Mădălina, Popa Veronica Elena

In addition, 14 partner representatives attended the event.

The participants were actively involved in all discussions, and group exercises, contributing valuable insights from their professional experience.

All participants received agenda in advance (see Annex I – Cross-border Workshop Agenda) and signed the attendance list (see Annex II – Attendance List). A confirmation of the online participants is included in the Annex III – Attendance Teams.

Data Protection

Prior to the start of the event, all participants completed and signed the Data Protection Consent Form (see Annex II – Consent form).

Objectives

The main objective of the event was to promote knowledge exchange, build trust and cooperation, and enhance awareness and capacity of LEAs (police officers) when working with suspects and accused persons, in line with Specific Objectives 7 and 8 of the project:

• Specific objective 7 - Promote increased exchange of knowledge and experiences between professionals, in order to increase communication, trust and cooperation, at the national and international levels;
• Specific objective 8 - Explore the potential of cross-professional dialogue to increase mutual understanding of professional contexts, in way of achieving common grounds in the protection of procedural guarantees, ensuring human rights and safeguarding the Rule of Law.

Event Concept and Structure

The first day of the workshop focused on introductory presentations, cross-national discussions, and practical exercises designed to apply the theoretical concepts in real-life scenarios. (see Annex I – Agenda).

The workshop began with an opening and welcome session, during which pplk. doc. PhDr. JUDr. Mgr. Jozef Medelský, PhD. and kpt. JUDr. Nina Laca, PhD. welcomed the participants and officially opened the event.

Afterwards prof. JUDr. Jozef Meteňko, PhD. (APZ) and Klaudia Kaczmarek (PPHS) presented the workshop’s objectives, structure, and agenda.

Presentation of WP2 Results prepared by UNIBO (online) presented the analysis of the implementation of EU directives and breaches of procedural rights.

During Cross-National Roundtable partners discussed national approaches to the protection of procedural rights during first interrogations, identifying comparative challenges and good practices. Each project partner presented the key outcomes of the national roundtable discussions. The Slovenian partner highlighted a lack of specialised education and training programmes, particularly those focused on working with juveniles. The Romanian partner drew attention to the high workload of police officers, who are often required to perform multiple roles in practice, including tasks that partially overlap with the role of a psychologist. The Bulgarian partner pointed to challenges related to the organisation of police work and difficulties in the practical implementation of EU directives at the operational level. On behalf of the Slovak partner, emphasis was placed on issues concerning the legal status and procedural position of suspects within criminal proceedings.

The practical part of the workshop included a scenario-based group exercise involving real persons serving prison sentences, which focused on communication and procedural rights from the suspect’s perspective, as well as Case Study 1, a simulation-based exercise on suspect’s rights led by plk. doc. JUDr. Veronika Marková, PhD. As part of the case study, the group presented the procedures followed by law enforcement officers, outlining the individual steps required in practice. The outcome of the case study highlighted differences in the time limits for the restriction of personal liberty across jurisdictions.

The day concluded with closing reflections, summarising the key insights and main takeaways from the discussions and practical activities of Day 1.

The first day concluded with a study visit to the Police Department in Bratislava and the Museum of the Police Force of the Slovak Republic, where participants had the opportunity to learn more about the history, structure, and daily operations of the Slovak Police.

The second day of the workshop began with a welcome and agenda overview, during which pplk. doc. PhDr. JUDr. Mgr. Jozef Medelský, PhD. and kpt. JUDr. Nina Laca, PhD. greeted the participants and introduced the day’s programme.

This was followed by Case Study, a simulation-based exercise on international cooperation, where participants worked in small groups on practical scenarios focusing on cross-border communication, decision-making, and procedural guarantees. The session was led by plk. doc. JUDr. Veronika Marková, PhD. and mjr. JUDr. Daniela Benedeková, PhD.

During the subsequent reflection session, group leaders presented the lessons learned and challenges identified during the simulation exercises.

The programme continued with a cross-national roundtable entitled “Sharing of Real-Life Cases,” where police officers from Poland, Romania, and Slovakia shared their experiences with cases involving accused persons, discussing both successful practices and areas for improvement. The session was moderated by mjr. JUDr. Daniela Benedeková, PhD.

During the evaluation and results session, participants completed the official EU survey as well as the survey prepared by the Slovak side, focusing on organizational and workshop-related matters. They also discussed the main insights and reflections from the two-day workshop. The session was facilitated by Capt. JUDr. Nina Laca, PhD., and Carolina Nogueira.

The event concluded with final remarks and closing speeches delivered by pplk. doc. PhDr. JUDr. Mgr. Jozef Medelský, PhD., who thanked the participants for their active engagement and contributions.

Participant Instructions

Prior to the discussions and case studies, the moderator presented the ground rules, outlining the objectives of the session, the structure of the discussions, and the expectations for participant engagement.

Evaluation

The evaluation of the Cross-Border Workshop for Law Enforcement Agencies, held in Bratislava on 5 December 2025, aimed to gather feedback from participants on the organization, content, technical arrangements, and overall impact of the event. The results indicate a very high level of satisfaction among participants, confirming that the workshop successfully met its objectives.

Overall satisfaction with the workshop reached an average score of 4.7 out of 5. The organization of the event was rated equally highly, reflecting effective planning and smooth coordination. Technical arrangements received an even higher score of 4.8 out of 5, indicating that the logistical and technical setup supported the workshop activities. Participant engagement was also rated at 4.8 out of 5, demonstrating that the format and content encouraged active involvement throughout the event. In addition, all participants confirmed that the workshop enabled them to build or strengthen professional contacts, highlighting its significant networking value.

The quality and expertise of the speakers were assessed very positively. Participants emphasized that the presentations and discussions contributed substantially to a better understanding of procedural rights. In particular, the opportunity to discuss different legal practices and procedural frameworks from participating countries was considered highly beneficial. The comparative perspective allowed participants to better understand how relevant EU directives are implemented across different criminal justice systems and how these implementations vary depending on national legal traditions.

The workshop had a clear impact on participants’ professional knowledge and awareness. By combining expert presentations with discussions and case studies, the event provided practical insights into procedural rights and their application in real-life situations. This approach enabled participants to reflect on their own national practices while learning from the experiences of colleagues from other countries.

Participants also identified several areas in which they would welcome further training and professional development. These included the rights of victims, particularly vulnerable persons, mechanisms to improve the effectiveness of interrogations, access to legal aid, and a deeper comparison of how suspects’ rights are implemented in different jurisdictions. These topics were seen as highly relevant for future capacity-building activities.

Interactive formats, especially discussions and case studies, were considered the most useful elements of the workshop. Participants appreciated the opportunity to actively engage, exchange experiences, and discuss practical challenges. Suggestions for improvement mainly focused on allocating more time to selected topics and expanding certain issues in greater depth.

In conclusion, the evaluation confirms that the cross-border workshop was highly successful. It provided valuable professional insights, strengthened cross-border cooperation, and created a solid foundation for future training activities and continued collaboration among law enforcement agencies.

Conclusions

The Cross-border Workshop for Law Enforcement Authorities held in Bratislava successfully fulfilled its objectives and demonstrated the added value of cross-border and cross-professional dialogue in the field of procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings. Through a combination of expert presentations, comparative discussions, and practical simulation-based exercises, the workshop enabled participants to deepen their understanding of procedural rights of suspects and accused persons, particularly in the context of first interrogations.

The workshop provided a valuable platform for the exchange of experiences among police officers from Slovakia, Poland, and Romania, allowing participants to compare national approaches to the implementation of EU directives and to identify both common challenges and good practices. The interactive format encouraged active engagement and critical reflection on real-life professional situations, contributing to increased awareness of human rights standards and their practical application in daily law enforcement work.

The evaluation results confirmed a very high level of participant satisfaction with the organization, content, and overall impact of the event. Participants highlighted the quality and expertise of the speakers, the relevance of the topics addressed, and the usefulness of discussions and case studies for their professional practice. The workshop also proved effective in strengthening professional networks and building trust among law enforcement authorities from different countries, thereby supporting long-term cross-border cooperation.

Overall, the workshop contributed meaningfully to enhancing knowledge, cooperation, and professional competence among law enforcement authorities, reinforcing the project’s broader objectives of safeguarding procedural rights, ensuring respect for human rights, and upholding the rule of law.