By Bruno Waterfield - 25th June 2006
New moves to boost EU justice powers in the area of policing, data sharing and rights will be unveiled on Wednesday, European justice commissioner Franco Frattini has told TheParliament.com.
On June 28, Frattini makes highly political proposals to shift law enforcement cooperation, cross-border policing and basic rights for suspects to the European level.
Fighting terrorism and cross-border crime is the frontline of an EU push to build a “Europe of results” in the absence of a European constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters last year.
Key to the strategy is an existing “bridging clause”, article 42 of the EU treaty, allowing justice decision-making to be moved to the European level.
“The idea is to explore the best areas where it is possible to shift from unanimity to qualified majority vote and to co-decision with the European parliament. It will be a rather open document as I do not want to prejudge the political discussion,” he told this website.
“I will stress the importance of making full use of the possibilities offered by article 42, which is the current treaty. This is not a matter of changing the present treaty, it is not a matter of anticipating the constitution. It is just an opportunity to overcome stalemate in very sensitive areas.”
Frattini will assure national governments – so far his intentions have received a mainly favourable but lukewarm response – that any moves will not be wholesale power shifts and will require, anyway, unanimity to happen in the first place.
Key allies for Frattini will be MEPs, because using the bridging, passerelle, brings decision-making into co-decision procedure, giving the European parliament equal weight.
“I am not talking about the entire space of criminal justice and police cooperation. It seems to me more appropriate to move step by step,” he said.
“If member states decide unanimously before, I hope, the end of the Finnish EU presidency to apply the passerelle clause, the automatic consequence will be co-decision procedure plus qualified majority vote plus strengthened powers for the European Court of Justice.”
Frattini’s bridging tactics will be three-pronged, starting with stalled proposals on cross-border police cooperation, measures including hot pursuit across frontiers and information exchange to tackle trafficking, terrorism and organised crime.
“In this area, we need harmonisation of operational rules in order to strengthen operational cooperation between police authorities on cross-border crime. So far, we have been unable to get an agreement; we started discussing it in 2004,” he said.
“We are wasting time, frankly speaking, in discussions about details, about one word, because of unanimity, while everyone acknowledges the importance of cross-border police cooperation.”
A related area will be to push the “availability principle” allowing law enforcers to share data on internet child pornography or highly mobile terror or mafia suspects.
Some progress has been made in this are area at the EU level with recent agreement on the European Evidence Warrant but, as Frattini observes, at a price.
“After three years of intense negotiations, finally, we agreed the European Evidence Warrant. Three years because of unanimity.”
“Frankly speaking, at the moment to get progress we need a framework decision, again unanimity, and the parliament is outside the game, because it is not in co-decision procedure,” he said.
“If we want to get this approved in time - and we do want to have in 2008 a fully operational principle of availability - making it possible for law enforcement agencies to exchange data and information without filters.”
But Frattini is not deaf to criticism, often from MEPs, that EU justice decisions are a one way street: lots of security measures but not much rights’ protection.
“We are strengthening the level of repressive measures while we are so far unable to get agreement on minimum standards protecting the rights of the accused person in the process.
“So far many member states are reluctant, we have not reached agreement and we are still blocked. I think it is impossible to think about renouncing a minimum common ground of procedural rights for people.”
The commissioner is adamant that he will stand up for procedural rights and guarantees to MEPs that he will insist there can be no pick-and-mix on his proposals.
“It is not good enough to renounce, at the European level, a common ground for procedural rights. My approach has always been a balanced approach, more security and more protection of fundamental rights,” he said.
“I cannot, while improving police powers, renounce guaranteeing an equal strengthening of procedural rights of people arrested or accused.”
For the future, Frattini envisages his proposals as a first step on a political journey to increased justice cooperation at the EU level – but, he notes, there are limits.
“I strongly hope for a unanimous decision allowing for the passerelle clause to be put in place concretely. Then of course we could select areas, we could prioritise fields where this principle could be anticipated,” he said.
“But if you think about areas like family law or civil law, I do not think it will be possible to have QMV across Europe.”
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.