According to an Estonian Presidency of the Council of the EU document consulted by EUROPE on Wednesday 8 November, discussions about the European information system on police records (ECRIS) are still stalling at the Council on the question of including dual European nationals. In an effort to find a way out of this impasse, the Presidency is examining two alternative solutions.
It should be recalled that the proposal put on the table at the end of June by the European Commission (see EUROPE 11819), seeks to update the ECRIS system and create a centralised ECRIS-TCN that will help to swiftly check whether a member state holds information regarding the previous convictions of a third country national.
On 12 October last, the majority of European Ministers for Justice agreed on the Presidency compromise to include within the system, people possessing the nationality of a third country as well as that of a member state (see EUROPE 11882). On the other hand, opinions strongly differ about whether to include dual European nationalities (possessing the nationality of two EU member states), suggested by the Council’s legal service. Opponents to this include the European Commission, which claims that the situation has already been covered by the ECRIS system.
In an effort to make progress on this issue, the Presidency is proposing in this document, two alternatives: the introduction of “temporary” references to these situations in the text in order to leave more time for examining this question before a final decision is taken in view of the general approaches; or including within the text, a re-examination clause calling on the Commission to, in the future, analyse opportunities for including people with several EU nationalities in the scope of these instruments’ application. For this second option, the Presidency is suggesting that this could be done five years after the entry into force of the legislative acts or after the ECRIS-TCN has begun operating.
Collecting digital imprints. Although the member states have agreed on limiting a collection of digital imprints to the most serious offences, their views continue to diverge on the question of precise criteria, explains the document.
In an attempt to “find a commonly acceptable solution” the Presidency has drawn up a list of criteria from which the member states will have to select. These include: the offence for which the person has been convicted was committed intentionally; in respect of the offence, a custodial sentence is foreseen in the national legislation; the person has been sentenced to a custodial sentence in respect of the offence; in respect of the offence, a custodial sentence was imposed, which has not been suspended. On the basis of the answers received, the Presidency will seek to propose a compromise.
Discussions will continue on Friday 10 November at the criminal law cooperation working group. It should be recalled that the Estonian Presidency of the Council of the EU would like to obtain a “general approach” on this text in December. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)