Brussels, 02/09/2008 (Agence Europe) - In an effort to fight against cross-border crime more effectively, MEPs very broadly gave their support to greater European cooperation in the area of criminal law. This was borne out by the adoption, during the Brussels plenary, of three consultative reports for bolstering Eurojust and the European Judicial Network, as well as for strengthening mutual recognition of judgements rendered in absentia. The two first texts were the subject of a political agreement at the JHA Council on 25 July (EUROPE 9712) and the third the subject of a general orientation on 6 June (EUROPE 9677).
Strengthening of Eurojust. The report by Renate Weber (ALDE, RO), adopted by 615 votes in favour, 64 against and 16 abstentions, relates to a proposal by 14 member states to strengthen the European judicial cooperation system in criminal law matters. The report therefore proposes the creation of a common basis of equivalent judicial powers for all national members when they are acting as the national authority of their member state. It also calls for links between Eurojust and the European Judicial Network to be strengthened through the creation of a national coordination system. And it wants it to be made compulsory for Eurojust to be given the information it needs. In addition, Parliament wishes to strengthen data protection, especially when data is forwarded to a third country. It also seeks to add the fight against the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography to Eurojust's priorities. Lastly, the EP wants the right to oversee the activities of the network.
European Judicial Network. The European Judicial Network (EJN) was set up in 1998. It consists of contact points at national level which provide each other with practical and legal information in order to facilitate judicial cooperation. The report by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL, DE), adopted by 618 votes in favour, 51 against and 12 abstentions, looks at a proposal by 14 member states seeking to replace the existing framework while preserving its structure and content. It strengthens the communication system between contact points through a more secure telecommunications network and clarifies relations between the EJN and Eurojust. Finally, the EP would like to have the right to control network activities by way of a written report sent to MEPs every two years.
Recognition of judgements rendered in absentia. The report by Armando França (PES, PT), adopted by 609 votes in favour, 60 against and 14 abstentions, follows a proposal by seven states for common rules to be laid down on the recognition and enforcement of judicial rulings handed down in a member state other than the one in which the person concerned is to be found (judgements rendered in absentia). In practice national judicial systems diverge and as a result the "enforcing" member state does not enforce the judgment. To reduce legal uncertainty, Parliament is proposing to define cases in which enforcement can be refused. It stresses the importance of duly summoning the individual concerned as well as the right to a retrial and the right to be represented by legal counsel. However, the report also emphasises that the fact of summoning a person to court is not in itself enough to guarantee a fair trial and that the system of a retrial does not exist in all member states. It therefore proposes that this could take the form of a right to an appeal. Lastly, the report calls for defendants to be given information in a language they understand and for them to have the right to legal representation, possibly paid for by the state.
The debate. On the eve of the vote on these three reports, a common discussion took place in which the French minister of justice, Rachida Dati, took part, together with MEPs and the European commissioner responsible for this subject, Jacques Barrot. This discussion revealed a common determination on the part of the institutions to step up cooperation between member states at a level of criminal law. British Conservatives were the only ones fiercely opposing any harmonisation of criminal law procedures and chose the traditional Anglo-Saxon legal model. In a direct link with the framework decision on the execution of judgements rendered in absentia, MEPs deplored the absence of European law on minimum procedural rights recognised in criminal law proceedings. In June 2007, member states failed to agree on such a project (EUROPE 9445). On this point, Commissioner Barrot said that there would be reflection on initiatives that could be taken in the near future in this area, adding: “I am quite decided on pushing this dossier forward. Perhaps a new proposal on procedural rights will be needed”. MEPs also expressed a wish for simplifying the decision making mechanism in criminal law, particularly in the Lisbon Treaty, which lays down decision making at the Council by qualified majority and co-decision of the European Parliament. (B.C./trans/rh)