In the present article, judgments of the European Court of Justice, together with the case of Aranyosi and Căldăraru, are put under the academic microscope. The analysis is conducted through the lenses of domestic judges. It starts by drawing a broader picture of the challenges that the domestic judiciary faces when it comes to EU criminal law, in particular the mutual recognition instruments. It argues that judges are faced not only with the legal framework of sometimes questionable quality but also with potential conflicts of loyalty resulting from the multiplicity and occasional inconsistency of applicable legal regimes. In turn, the analysis moves to the exegesis of the Aranyosi and Căldăraru line of jurisprudence, in particular to the already mentioned security vs justice conundrum, which domestic judges sometimes face. The article ends with conclusions looking into the current state of affairs, and suggestions are made regarding the way forward.

中文翻译：

---

天空不是无限：相互信任和相互认可aprèsAranyosi和Caldararu

在本文中，欧洲法院的判决连同Aranyosi和Căldăraru案一起置于学术显微镜下。分析是通过国内法官的眼光进行的。首先从更广泛的角度了解国内司法部门在涉及欧盟刑法时面临的挑战，尤其是相互承认文书。它认为，法官不仅面临着质量有时令人质疑的法律框架，而且还面临着因适用法律制度的多样性和偶发性不一致而可能引起的忠诚度冲突。反过来，分析则转向了Aranyosi和Căldăraru法学界的诠释，特别是已经提到的国内法官有时面对的安全与正义之谜。