Brussels, 19/11/2001 (Agence Europe) - After Friday's JHA Council, which obtained mitigated results, Belgian Justice Minister Marc Verwilghen said he was confident that a political agreement would be reached at the Council on 6 and 7 December on the European arrest warrant and on incrimination of terrorism, as requested by the Ghent Summit. He warned, however, that Member States must still make an effort. We give below further details on our report before the Council came to a close (see EUROPE of 17 November, p.7):
European arrest warrant: There was finally no agreement on the scope of the European arrest warrant, although the thirteen delegations (not including Italy and Ireland) gave their agreement on the list proposed. Italy has still to specify its position, but it would seem it hopes to limit the scope of the warrant to infringements that are the subject of an agreement on the search for and the handing over of persons between Spain and Italy: terrorism, organised crime, drugs trafficking, arms trade, the trade in human beings. The list accepted by 13 countries includes: participation in a criminal organisation, terrorism, the trade in human beings, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, the illegal trafficking of narcotics, illegal arms trade, corruption, fraud (including against the Communities' financial interests), the laundering of money from crime, counterfeiting and forgery of the euro, cyber-crime, crimes against the environment, voluntary homicide, assault and battery, the illegal trafficking of human organs and human tissue, kidnapping and hostage-taking, racism and xenophobia, organised or armed robbery, the illegal trafficking of cultural goods, fraud, racket and embezzling, the counterfeiting or piracy of products, falsification of administrative documents, falsification of means of payment, the illegal trafficking of hormonal substances and other growth factors, the trafficking of nuclear and radioactive matter, trafficking of stolen vehicles, rape, aid and abetting of illegal admission and stay, arson, and crimes that come under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal.
Marc Verwilghen confirmed that, in the next few weeks the delegations would be working on the base of the Luxembourg proposal not to do away with double incrimination except for infringements that are liable to at least four months imprisonment. The minister, like Commissioner Antonio Vitorino, recognised that the proposal aimed to considerably reduce the scope of the project. Marc Verwilghen is not keen on this proposal that does not help to make the broad scope requested in Ghent available - "quite the contrary". Regarding the deadline for implementing the warrant, 14 States agreed to foresee the following provisions: 10 days if the person agrees to be transferred, otherwise 60 days, with an additional 30 days in exceptional cases, with justification. All, except Germany, agreed to temporary transfer or a hearing during the time that the warrant is being examined.
Incrimination of terrorism: The Council did manage to reach an agreement on the definition of terrorism, although no agreement was reached on sanctions. Discussions will be continued on the basis of a German proposal of maximum penalties of at least 5 years and 15 years for participation in or the leadership of a terrorist group, although to date discussions have been founded on the Presidency's proposal of 8 and 20 years. The Commission also put forward a new proposal.
Sweden, which insisted that the definition should be made within a clear framework, lifted its substantive reservation but has still to present the text to its parliament. The text specifies that nothing in the present framework decision can be interpreted as aimed at reducing or hampering fundamental rights or freedoms such as the freedom to meet, of association or of expression. This includes the right among other things to found trade unions and to join forces with trade unions to defend one's interests, and the relevant right to demonstrate. All Member States should define terrorist infringements as being: - intentional action that, because of its nature or context, may be highly damaging to a country or an international organisation, through attacks against the life of a person and serious attacks against the physical integrity of a person; - kidnapping or taking of hostages; - causing massive destruction to a public installation, transport system, or infrastructure (including IT); - the capture of aircraft, ships or other means of collective transport; - the manufacture and use of firearms, nuclear weapons, and biological and chemical weapons; - the causing of fires, explosions or floods that place human lives in danger; - the disturbance or interruption of water supplies, electricity or any other fundamental natural resource placing lives in danger; - and threats that any of the above will be carried out. The text specifies that these infringements should not be considered as terrorist acts unless they are committed in the aim of seriously intimidating a population or unduly forcing public authorities or an international organisation to accomplish or abstain from accomplishing any act in order to destabilise or destroy the political, constitutional or economic structures of a country or of an international organisation.
Assessment of the Tampere programme. As they left the discussions on the Tampere Programme (aimed to prepare the assessment that the European Council of Brussels-Laeken will publish on the Tampere Programme of October 1999) the Belgian Interior Minister, Antoine Duquesne, and Commissioner Antonio Vitorino, said that people should not lose heart when considering the problems. The Ministers all acknowledged the delays and shortcomings of the working methods (see EUROPE of 10 November, p.5) and managed to reach broad consensus on organising a one-day JHA Council every month with a shorter agenda. The discussion confirmed the disagreements over the decision-making process (whether to keep unanimous decision-making or more to qualified majority voting); the importance of mutual recognition; or whether a stand-still should be organised on asylum and immigration issues. In its assessment report on Tampere, the Presidency recommended in effect that the EU organise a kind of moratorium on asylum and immigration to avoid incorporating regulations into its legislation that might run counter to the decisions currently being taken at EU level. European ambassadors signalled that this "stand-still" clause was unlikely to be agreed upon without some difficulty.
The broad discussions on how to how to harmonise sentences was postponed until the next Council meeting (due to lack of time). The Council approved (without debate) the work programme for the European Police College for 2001; practical details of the strengthened comparison with CIREFI (Information Centre on Frontiers and Immigration) and Europol with regard to clandestine immigration; a report on the need to bring Member States' legislation closer together in the field of civil law, in which it calls on the Commission to continue looking at this issue with the aim of publishing a Green or White Paper by 31 December 2002.