Brussels, 11/04/2007 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday, many experts gave their support to a proposal designed to reinforce the powers of the European Police Office (Europol), an organisation which, they feel, should eventually have a major role to play in fighting cross-border crime within the Union.
A public hearing, which was organised by the committee on civil liberties (LIBE) of the European Parliament, provided the opportunity for many of those taking part to discuss the current proposal of the European Commission on the future legal status of Europol (EUROPE 9232). The Convention instituting Europol would be replaced by a decision of the Council. This proposal aims mainly to turn the Office into a proper agency of the Union (Community budget, staff status, etc.). It also extends Europol's mandate for the whole range of serious cross-border crime and gives the organisation prerogatives on the ground in cooperation with the member states. The first to call for this change is none other than the Director of Europol, the German Max-Peter Ratzel, who stresses that it is imperative for his organisation to evolve, in the same way that the threat of terrorism and organised crime has evolved since the early 1990s. “An integrated horizontal approach (to fighting crime) on European Union level is vital”, he stressed, also taking the opportunity to voice his support for the changes put forward by the member states and the institutions of the EU. For his part, the representative of the German presidency, Michael Niemeier, (Federal Interior Minister) stated that the Commission's proposal contained a large number of major improvements, such as the extension of Europol's mandate, which is currently restricted to cross-border crime alone. According to him, Europol will finally be able to take effective action against violent criminals, hooliganism and the distribution of child pornography-related materials. Even so, Willy Bruggeman, president of the Belgian Federal Police Council and former Deputy Coordinator of Europol, feels that the proposal does not go far enough. “What I see in the text now is that it is consolidating the current legal framework of Europol, modernising to some extent Europol's functioning and maybe creating a basis for future developments. But future developments are not yet in the text as far as I see it”, he commented, stating that there was a “lack of global vision in the European Union about security”.
And what of data protection? It is certainly very important to reach a political agreement on the text, said Agustín Díaz de Mera (EPP-ED, Spain), the rapporteur on the proposal for the Parliament. But it is also essential to have an in-depth discussion on how to guarantee that the data provided by the private sector is accurate. Furthermore, “it is absolutely crucial that data remain confidential”, added the MEP, who is in favour of a fair balance between security and liberty in Europe. Some of those who spoke voiced doubts as to the usefulness of gathering too much information. “These proposals give Europol a carte blanche to collect whatever information it wants, regardless of its relevance”, lamented British Conservative member Syed Kamall (EPP-ED) in a press release. Similarly, the European Data Protection Controller (EDPC), Peter Hustinx, warned against any uncontrolled access to what he described as “soft data”, outside criminal investigations. Lastly, Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (PES) wondered aloud how Europol would protect data in the framework of police cooperation with third countries, a problem which has already frequently arisen in the framework of the ENP and the Swift case. Nonetheless, in Mr Ratzel's view, the kind of information required by Europol in no way threatens privacy. “We do not, for example, seek such information as data on consumers from supermarkets”, he said, adding: “Our databases are on organised or serious international crime so I would assume that ordinary citizens would not have any possibility of being there”.
It is worth noting that the Europol Director gave a somewhat feverish welcome to some of the proposals contained within the text. First of all, on the planned reinforcement of the budgetary powers of the Parliament over Europol (Budget 2006: €60 million), he said: “I am not against the proposals but I think we need more time to consider the full implications of these proposed changes”. On the other hand, he did not deny the effect of the increased role of the Parliament in favour of the “democratic” nature of Europol. Another concern was the fact that the agents of the Office (of whom there are 480) would be put under the status of Community civil servants (possible increase in salary for Europol staff?; limitations on seconding officials from the member states?). “We need to know exactly how this would work. Also, we have no idea what these measures will mean on the operational side”, he concluded. (bc)