Tampere, 22/09/2006 (Agence Europe) - On Thursday, the EU's justice ministers backed the idea of harmonising civil law legislation and discussed the idea of creating an EU civil code. We need clearer, harmonised rules in the form of a legislative text, said Finnish justice minister Leena Luhtanen after the meeting of EU justice and home affairs ministers in Tampere, Finland. In this connection, the Finnish Presidency urged the Commission to prepare a proposal to codify civil law in order to simplify life for citizens, explained Ms Luhtanen, adding that such harmonisation would not actually be able to get off the ground in practical terms for a few years yet. The EU Commissioner responsible for such matters, Franco Frattini, said that some harmonisation was required if one wanted to create an area of justice, but warned that this meant harmonising quality rather than quantity and for this reason, the Commission would be carrying out impact studies. The President of the European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee, Jean-Marie Cavada, told ministers that he could not imagine an EU policy moving slower than civil society. The EU already has several measures on various civil law proceedings that are in the final stages of negotiations. Most of them concern direct implementation of civil law rulings in all Member States' courts, and many contain measures concerning the allocation of cases among Member States, the power of courts and receipt of evidence. The fact that various measures cover a rather small area and are partially redundant is another problem, explained the Finnish Presidency. This is the case, for example, for debt collection procedures in other Member States, where some four different types of proceedings can be used.
The ministers were again faced with deadlock over cooperation in criminal law. Luhtanen said everyone had said that practical cooperation was necessary and she was happy that the idea expressed at Tampere seven years ago on the direct implementation of rulings by the judicial authorities ('mutual recognition') would continue. But in reality, various Member States were sceptical about the idea of moving in the direction of harmonisation in this domain. One EU source told this newsletter that it was clear that the Finnish Presidency and the European Commission were being blocked in this field. Only three countries went against the idea of more harmonised legislation, namely the United Kingdom (which prefers actual cooperation in the field), the Netherlands and Malta. Mickael Kennedy, President of Eurojust (with responsibility for coordination cross-border tracking of suspects in the EU) made it clear that he had detected cooperation problems in the field and a lack of desire by several ministers in this area. Cavada was the most critical, asking whether a new September 11 would be required to get things to change. Luxembourg's justice minister, Luc Frieden, said mutual recognition presupposed mutual trust, which in the long-term had to lead to a level of harmonisation. Many participants warned that before such new proposals were launched, it would be better to carefully study whether new legislation was needed in the various Member States and what the value-added of such new legislation would be, to ensure they actually help with tracking suspects across the EU. Ms Luthanen said that there would be further discussion about initiatives already launched, like the draft framework decision on the transfer of detainees, on which agreement in principle is expected to be reached during the Finnish Presidency. Ms Luthanen summed up by warning that boosting mutual recognition of judicial rulings would be a long process.