Rome, 15/09/2003 (Agence Europe) - Summing up the results of the informal meeting of European Justice Ministers in Rome on Saturday morning, Italian Minister Roberto Castelli first of all congratulated his colleagues on the "friendly atmosphere" prevalent between them. The Ministers discussed two dossiers- the length of civil trails and the conditions for the implementation of prison sentences- which come under the sole authority of the Member States. In these fields, European co-operation consists above all of communicating good practice, or discussing bad experiences, said a European diplomatic source.
Italy, the country most often brought before the European Court of Human Rights for the length of its trials both civil and criminal, included this subject on the agenda. Roberto Castelli told a press conference that "all Member States" acknowledged that they had difficulties regulating the length of trials, especially for civil trials. Community competence in the field is limited to issues with cross-border implications. Various proposals for the rapid implementation of judgements in cross-border cases or to simplify the regulation of such cases are on the table of the Council or are being prepared (EUROPE of 11 September, p.9). During a press conference, Commissioner Antonio Vitorino stressed the importance of the proposal on the European writ of execution.
As for the conditions for the implementation of prison sentences, Roberto Castelli pointed out that the Commission had sent out a questionnaire, at the request of the Italian Presidency, in order to establish a detailed inventory of the status quo in all Member States. There can be "friction" if there are "overly large gaps" between the implementation of prison sentences across different Member States, especially now that legal co-operation is being reinforced by the European Arrest Warrant, said French Justice Minister Dominique Perben (see next article). He emphasised that all Member States experiment with alternative solutions to detention, and that "it should not be" that a European regulation could block those efforts. On the contrary, he pronounced himself in favour of "an exchange of practices" and the adoption "when possible of similar provisions".