European arrest warrant: EU & UK

In the report Justice issues in Europe, the UK House of Commons Justice Committee discusses matters relevant to the development of the European Union’s area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ).

This timely report is interesting both generally and from a British point of view.

In this blog post we look at the European arrest warrant.





Stockholm Programme


In the European Union’s 2010─2014 Stockholm Programme – An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens, the European Council invited the European Commission to (document 5731/10; page 40):

… explore the results of the evaluation of the European Arrest Warrant, and, where appropriate, make proposals to increase efficiency and legal protection for individuals in the process of surrender, by adopting a step-by-step approach to other instruments on mutual recognition; ...

Stockholm Programme Action Plan


Since then, the proposed Action Plan for the implementation of the Stockholm Programme has been published in 21 official EU languages:




Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens - Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme; Brussels, 20.4.2010; COM(2010) 171 final


(The Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council has issued its first conclusions on the Action Programme (document 8920/10).)


In the Action Plan, under the headline Furthering the implementation of mutual recognition (in the area of criminal law), the Commission has promised to report on the implementation of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European Arrest Warrant in 2010 and to contribute with “appropriate follow-up” in 2014.



European arrest warrant



For an overview of the European Arrest Warrant, you can consult the relevant summary of EU legislation on Europa (latest update 8 January 2010).




You can also read the Wikipedia encyclopedia entry European Arrest Warrant, including critical viewpoints (last update 29 April 2010).



Here is the consolidated version (28 March 2009) of:



COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States

The provisions defining the European arrest warrant and setting out its scope:

CHAPTER 1
GENERAL PRINCIPLES



Article 1
Definition of the European arrest warrant and obligation to execute it


1. The European arrest warrant is a judicial decision issued by a Member State with a view to the arrest and surrender by another Member State of a requested person, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order.

2. Member States shall execute any European arrest warrant on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition and in accordance with the provisions of this Framework Decision.

3. This Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.



Article 2
Scope of the European arrest warrant


1. A European arrest warrant may be issued for acts punishable by the law of the issuing Member State by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least 12 months or, where a sentence has been passed or a detention order has been made, for sentences of at least four months.

2. The following offences, if they are punishable in the issuing Member State by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years and as they are defined by the law of the issuing Member State, shall, under the terms of this Framework Decision and without verification of the double criminality of the act, give rise to surrender pursuant to a European arrest warrant:

— participation in a criminal organisation,
— terrorism,
— trafficking in human beings,
— sexual exploitation of children and child pornography,
— illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances,
— illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives,
— corruption,
— fraud, including that affecting the financial interests of the European Communities within the meaning of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests,
— laundering of the proceeds of crime,
— counterfeiting currency, including of the euro,
— computer-related crime,
— environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties,
— facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence,
— murder, grievous bodily injury,
— illicit trade in human organs and tissue,
— kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking,
— racism and xenophobia,
— organised or armed robbery,
— illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art,
— swindling,
— racketeering and extortion,
— counterfeiting and piracy of products,
— forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein,
— forgery of means of payment,
— illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters,
— illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials,
— trafficking in stolen vehicles,
— rape,
— arson,
— crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court,
— unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships,
— sabotage.

3. The Council may decide at any time, acting unanimously after consultation of the European Parliament under the conditions laid down in Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), to add other categories of offence to the list contained in paragraph 2. The Council shall examine, in the light of the report submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 34(3), whether the list should be extended or amended.

4. For offences other than those covered by paragraph 2, surrender may be subject to the condition that the acts for which the European arrest warrant has been issued constitute an offence under the law of the executing Member State, whatever the constituent elements or however it is described.

House of Commons Justice Committee


One of the relatively rare assessments of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) in the European Union published after the Stockholm Programme and before the adoption of the implementing Action Plan is:




UK House of Commons Justice Committee: Justice issues in Europe (HC 162-I; published 6 April 2010; 60 pages)



On page 19 the Committee noted that according to the Ministry of Justice, the European arrest warrant had:

• transformed extradition arrangements between EU member states
• played an important role in the UK’s fight against international and trans-national criminality
• prevented countries from refusing to surrender fugitives
• reduced the time taken to surrender fugitives from an average of 18 months under previous extradition arrangements to around 50 days, and
• enabled the UK to extradite over 1000 fugitives to other EU member states (since introduction) and, in 2008, nearly 100 wanted persons were surrendered back to the UK to face criminal proceedings.

Some problematic questions have surfaced as shown by the cases mentioned in Box 2 (pages 21 and 22).


After a discussion of difficulties with regard to individuals’ rights, the possible need for a proportionality test and potential means to remedy application problems, the Justice Committee concluded (on pages 24 to 25; point 50):

50. It is unfortunate that the successful use of the European arrest warrant, and the reduced time taken to process intra-EU extraditions, has been overshadowed by perceived injustices in individual cases. We welcome the conclusions of the evaluation of the warrant, adopted by the Council in June 2009, and the subsequent progress that has been made. However, we believe that the time it takes to review and reform such instruments undermines the mutual trust approach. Legislation should be used only as a last resort to resolving the issues over proportionality and we hope that the current approach bears fruit before the predicted growth in demand for European arrest warrants takes place.

The Committee then went on to discuss the threshold of inoperability regarding amending or accompanying EU measures, when the United Kingdom does not opt in. Regarding future developments under the Lisbon Treaty, matters were left suspended in thinnish air (page 26; point 54):

54. We are encouraged that neither the Minister, nor any of our witnesses, were able to provide a convincing example of a situation in which an existing measure would be rendered inoperable as a result of the UK’s decision not to participate. Nevertheless, we are concerned that the term “inoperable” is not defined in the protocol and that guidance is not available on its interpretation.

Ralf Grahn



P.S. If you have information about general or national publications assessing the EU’s justice and home affairs (JHA), the Stockholm Programme or the proposal for the implementing Action Plan, please feel free to share it with the readers of Grahnlaw, by posting a comment or by sending me an e-mail.

Stockholm Programme Action Plan now in 21 EU languages

Earlier we have noted the publication in three languages ─ English, French and German ─ of the proposed Action Plan implementing the European Union’s Stockholm Programme in justice and home affairs (JHA):



EN - English



Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens - Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme; Brussels, 20.4.2010; COM(2010) 171 final



FR - French



Mettre en place un espace de liberté, de sécurité et de justice au service des citoyens européens - Plan d'action mettant en oeuvre le programme de Stockholm ; Bruxelles, le 20.4.2010 ; COM(2010) 171 final



DE - German



Ein Raum der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts für die Bürger Europas - Aktionsplan zur Umsetzung des Stockholmer Programms; Brüssel, den 20.4.2010; KOM(2010) 171 endgültig




18 new language versions



Now 18 more language versions of the important Communication COM(2010) 171 have been added, bringing the total number to 21. Among the 23 official EU languages, only Estonian (ET – eesti keel) and Irish (GA – Gaeilge) re not represented.


In order to illustrate the linguistic diversity of the European Union and to recapitulate the language symbols, we present the published language versions separately. At the same time, this experiment shows us if the language versions with diacritic marks or based on non-latin alphabets appear correctly in this blog post on Blogger:




BG – Bulgarian



Брюксел, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 окончателен
СЪОБЩЕНИЕ НА КОМИСИЯТА ДО ЕВРОПЕЙСКИЯ ПАРЛАМЕНТ, СЪВЕТА, ЕВРОПЕЙСКИЯ ИКОНОМИЧЕСКИ И СОЦИАЛЕН КОМИТЕТ И КОМИТЕТА НА РЕГИОНИТЕ
Установяване на пространство на свобода, сигурност и правосъдие за гражданите на Европа
План за действие за изпълнение на Програмата от Стокхолм



ES – Spanish



Bruselas, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 final
COMUNICACIÓN DE LA COMISIÓN AL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO, AL CONSEJO, AL COMITÉ ECONÓMICO Y SOCIAL EUROPEO Y AL COMITÉ DE LAS REGIONES
Garantizar el espacio de libertad, seguridad y justicia para los ciudadanos europeos
Plan de acción por el que se aplica el programa de Estocolmo



CS – Czech



V Bruselu dne 20.4.2010
KOM(2010) 171 v konečném znění
SDĚLENÍ KOMISE EVROPSKÉMU PARLAMENTU, RADĚ, EVROPSKÉMU HOSPODÁŘSKÉMU A SOCIÁLNÍMU VÝBORU A VÝBORU REGIONŮ
Poskytování prostoru svobody, bezpečnosti a práva evropským občanům
Akční plán provádění Stockholmského programu



DA – Danish



Bruxelles, den 20.4.2010
KOM(2010) 171 endelig
MEDDELELSE FRA KOMMISSIONEN TIL EUROPA-PARLAMENTET, RÅDET, DET ØKONOMISKE OG SOCIALE UDVALG OG REGIONSUDVALGET
Et område med frihed, sikkerhed og retfærdighed for EU’s borgere
Handlingsplan om gennemførelse af Stockholmprogrammet



EL – Greek



Βρυξέλλες, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 τελικό
ΑΝΑΚΟΙΝΩΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗΣ ΣΤΟ ΕΥΡΩΠΑΪΚΟ ΚΟΙΝΟΒΟΥΛΙΟ, ΤΟ ΣΥΜΒΟΥΛΙΟ, ΤΗΝ ΕΥΡΩΠΑΪΚΗ ΟΙΚΟΝΟΜΙΚΗ ΚΑΙ ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΚΗ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ ΚΑΙ ΤΗΝ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ ΤΩΝ ΠΕΡΙΦΕΡΕΙΩΝ
Για ένα χώρο ελευθερίας, ασφάλειας και δικαιοσύνης στην υπηρεσία των πολιτών της Ευρώπης
Σχέδιο δράσης για την εφαρμογή του προγράμματος της Στοκχόλμης



IT – Italian



Bruxelles, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 definitivo
COMUNICAZIONE DELLA COMMISSIONE AL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO, AL CONSIGLIO, AL COMITATO ECONOMICO E SOCIALE EUROPEO E AL COMITATO DELLE REGIONI
Creare uno spazio di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia per i cittadini europei
Piano d'azione per l'attuazione del programma di Stoccolma



LV – Latvian



Briselē, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 galīgā redakcija
KOMISIJAS PAZIŅOJUMS EIROPAS PARLAMENTAM, PADOMEI, EIROPAS EKONOMIKAS UN SOCIĀLO LIETU KOMITEJAI UN REĢIONU KOMITEJAI
Brīvības, drošības un tiesiskuma telpas nodrošināšana Eiropas pilsoņiem
Stokholmas programmas īstenošanas rīcības plāns



LT – Lithuanian



Briuselis, 2010.4.20
KOM(2010) 171 galutinis
KOMISIJOS KOMUNIKATAS EUROPOS PARLAMENTUI, TARYBAI, EUROPOS EKONOMIKOS IR SOCIALINIŲ REIKALŲ KOMITETUI IR REGIONŲ KOMITETUI
Sukurti laisvės, saugumo ir teisingumo erdvę Europos piliečiams
Stokholmo programos įgyvendinimo veiksmų planas



HU – Hungarian



Brüsszel, 2010.4.20.
COM(2010) 171 végleges
A BIZOTTSÁG KÖZLEMÉNYE AZ EURÓPAI PARLAMENTNEK, A TANÁCSNAK, AZ EURÓPAI GAZDASÁGI ÉS SZOCIÁLIS BIZOTTSÁGNAK ÉS A RÉGIÓK BIZOTTSÁGÁNAK
A szabadság, a biztonság és a jog érvényesülésén alapuló térség megvalósítása a polgárok szolgálatában
A stockholmi program végrehajtásáról szóló cselekvési terv



MT – Maltese



Brussel 20.4.2010
KUMM(2010) 171 finali
KOMUNIKAZZJONI MILL-KUMMISSJONI LILL-PARLAMENT EWROPEW, ILKUNSILL, IL-KUMITAT EKONOMIKU U SOĊJALI EWROPEW U L-KUMITAT TAR-REĠJUNI
Il-kisba ta' żona ta' libertà, sigurtà u ġustizzja għaċ-ċittadini tal-Ewropa
Pjan ta' Azzjoni li Jimplimenta l-Programm ta' Stokkolma



NL – Dutch



Brussel, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 definitief
MEDEDELING VAN DE COMMISSIE AAN HET EUROPEES PARLEMENT, DE RAAD, HET EUROPEES ECONOMISCH EN SOCIAAL COMITÉ EN HET COMITÉ VAN DE REGIO'S
Een ruimte van vrijheid, veiligheid en recht voor de burgers van Europa
Actieplan ter uitvoering van het programma van Stockholm



PL – Polish



Bruksela, dnia 20.4.2010
KOM(2010) 171 wersja ostateczna
KOMUNIKAT KOMISJI DO PARLAMENTU EUROPEJSKIEGO, RADY, EUROPEJSKIEGO KOMITETU EKONOMICZNO-SPOŁECZNEGO I KOMITETU REGIONÓW
Przestrzeń wolności, bezpieczeństwa i sprawiedliwości dla europejskich obywateli
Plan działań służący realizacji programu sztokholmskiego



PT – Portuguese



Bruxelas, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 final
COMUNICAÇÃO DA COMISSÃO AO PARLAMENTO EUROPEU, AO CONSELHO, AO COMITÉ ECONÓMICO E SOCIAL EUROPEU E AO COMITÉ DAS REGIÕES
Realização de um espaço de liberdade, de segurança e de justiça para os cidadãos europeus
Plano de Acção de aplicação do Programa de Estocolmo



RO – Romanian



Bruxelles, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 final
COMUNICARE A COMISIEI CĂTRE PARLAMENTUL EUROPEAN, CONSILIU, COMITETUL ECONOMIC ȘI SOCIAL EUROPEAN ȘI COMITETUL REGIUNILOR
Crearea unui spațiu de libertate, securitate și justiție pentru cetățenii Europei
Plan de acțiune pentru punerea în aplicare a Programului de la Stockholm



SK – Slovak



Brusel, 20.4.2010
KOM(2010) 171 v konečnom znení
OZNÁMENIE KOMISIE EURÓPSKEMU PARLAMENTU, RADE, EURÓPSKEMU HOSPODÁRSKEMU A SOCIÁLNEMU VÝBORU A VÝBORU REGIÓNOV
Vytvorenie priestoru slobody, bezpečnosti a spravodlivosti pre európskych občanov
Akčný plán na implementáciu Štokholmského programu



SL – Slovenian



Bruselj, 20.4.2010
COM(2010) 171 konč.
SPOROČILO KOMISIJE EVROPSKEMU PARLAMENTU, SVETU, EVROPSKEMU EKONOMSKO-SOCIALNEMU ODBORU IN ODBORU REGIJ
Zagotavljanje območja svobode, varnosti in pravice za državljane Evrope
Akcijski načrt izvajanja stockholmskega programa



FI – Finnish



Bryssel 20.4.2010
KOM(2010) 171 lopullinen
KOMISSION TIEDONANTO EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE, NEUVOSTOLLE, EUROOPAN TALOUS- JA SOSIAALIKOMITEALLE JA ALUEIDEN KOMITEALLE
Vapauden, turvallisuuden ja oikeuden alueen toteuttaminen EU:n kansalaisten hyväksi
Toimintasuunnitelma Tukholman ohjelman toteuttamiseksi



SV – Swedish



Bryssel den 20.4.2010
KOM(2010) 171 slutlig
MEDDELANDE FRÅN KOMMISSIONEN TILL EUROPAPARLAMENTET, RÅDET, EUROPEISKA EKONOMISKA OCH SOCIALA KOMMITTÉN OCH REGIONKOMMITTÉN
Att förverkliga ett område med frihet, säkerhet och rättvisa för EU-medborgarna
Handlingsplan för att genomföra Stockholmsprogrammet




If you have information about general or national publications assessing the EU’s Stockholm Programme and the proposal for the implementing Action Plan, please feel free to share it with the readers of Grahnlaw, by posting a comment or by sending me an e-mail.




Ralf Grahn

UK & EU: Justice issues in Europe (Introduction)

One of the relatively rare assessments of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) in the European Union published after the Stockholm Programme and before the adoption of the implementing Action Plan is:




UK House of Commons Justice Committee: Justice issues in Europe (HC 162-I; published 6 April 2010; 60 pages)


In this blog post we summarise the Introduction.



Introduction


The Committee Report is the result of a fairly detailed (page 5):

…inquiry into justice issues in Europe with a particular focus on developments and the implications for the 2.2 million British citizens living in other member states and 2.12 million people living in the UK who were born in another member state.

The Report briefly recapitulates the history of the EU’s area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ): the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Tampere Programme and the Hague Programme (page 5).


The Report describes the area of freedom, security and justice as still very much a “work in progress”, before embarking on an outline on the future work to be done under the Stockholm Programme (page 6).


The Committee notes that mutual trust is fairly easy to grasp, but hard to achieve in the field of legislation and policy on justice (page 6).


Box 1 on pages 8 and 9 contains a convenient overview of justice priorities in the Stockholm Programme, under the following headlines:

• Promoting citizenship and fundamental rights
• A Europe of law and justice
• A Europe that protects
• Improving the quality of legislation and its implementation

With the establishment of mutual trust as a cornerstone of judicial cooperation and the fundamental rights of EU (and UK) citizens as starting points, the Committee chose the following key themes for its inquiry (page 9):

• The need to strike balances between proportionality, the rights of suspects and the accused in criminal proceedings, and the enforcement of security at EU and national level through mutual co-operation.
• The balance between basic principles of justice and fairness for victims and the rights of suspects and defendants rights and levels of awareness of those rights
• The cost-benefits of activity to create an area of freedom, security and justice
• The extent of monitoring and evaluation and the relative lack of enforcement.

The emphasis is on criminal justice issues (page 9).



The Committee starts its treatment of the Lisbon Treaty with a short historic overview from the Treaty of Amsterdam, before a summary of the changes brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon and the UK opt-in protocol, as well as a description of the emergency brake (pages 10 to 12).


The extended jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is explained on page 12. It remains unclear if Britain will opt in to the jurisdiction of the CJEU within the five year timeframe (page 17).


The Committee describes the legal entry into force of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and mentions that the European Union aims to accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (page 12 to 13).


Will the Lisbon Treaty facilitate legislation and policy-making in the field of justice? The initial response of the Committee is cautious (page 13 to 14).


Naturally, the extraordinary position of the United Kingdom has to be discussed. The Committee argues that the position of UK participation has become more flexible, but clarifications are needed with respect to amendments Britain opposes, although it has consented to the original provisions. The Committee depicts the UK’s role in EU justice and home affairs as a key one (page 14 to 16).


The Committee welcomed the Government’s pragmatic attitude (evidence-based practical measures; “look before you legislate”) and it was encouraged by seeing this perspective reflected in the Stockholm Programme (page 16).


The Committee notes that mutual recognition is at the heart of what the EU is trying to achieve in the area of freedom, security and justice under the Stockholm programme and the Lisbon Treaty. The Government of Britain is extremely cautious about approximation (harmonisation) of criminal law, but the Committee remarks that the proposals in the Stockholm Programme and the Lisbon Treaty together give rise to the potential for a significant body of new law (pages 17 and 18).




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Information about materials from different member states and in various EU languages on the Stockholm Programme and the proposed Action Plan for implementation is most welcome. Write a comment or send me an e-mail about unofficial and official publications

UK & EU: Stockholm Programme home affairs

In an earlier Grahnlaw blog post House of Lords on EU Stockholm Programme (10 November 2009), ahead of the adoption of the Stockholm Programme, we highlighted the publication of:




UK House of Lords European Union Committee: The Stockholm Programme: home affairs (HL Paper 175; published 9 November 2009; 32 pages).


Since then, the Stockholm Programme has been adopted (document 17024/09 or 5731/10) and the proposed Action Programme COM(2010) 171 final for implementation has been published in three official EU languages. The Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council has issued its first conclusions on the Action Programme (8920/10).



Background note


Despite the peculiar status of the United Kingdom and these later developments, the report by the European Union Committee is worth reading as a guide to and background note on the home affairs issues within the EU’s emerging area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ).


The Introduction (page 5 to 6) offers a brief outline of the area of freedom, security and justice: the Treaty of Amsterdam (since 1999), the Tampere Programme (2000─2004), the Hague Programme (2005─2009) and the process leading towards the Stockholm Programme (2010─2014), as well as the effects of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which opens up new possibilities.


The European Union Committee rightly criticised the lack of public consultation, involvement and publicity of the Interior Future Group, which laid the foundations for the Stockholm Programme (page 6).


The House of Lords Committee noted the heavy weight of immigration and asylum matters ─ more than half of the initiatives ─ in its outline of priority issues in the Commission’s Communication (page 7).


The Commission wanted to see progress regarding other home affairs matters: data protection; the fight against organised crime, including improvement of methods for seizing the proceeds of crime; strengthening civil protection and critical infrastructure protection; the fight against terrorism, including a strategy for dealing with CBRN attacks (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) (page 8).


Like the UK Government, the HL European Union Committee was supportive of a five year programme, and it wanted to see early action on the proposals from the Commission (page 8).



Comment: Heavy on security, light on rights


Both the Stockholm Programme ─ An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens (document 5731/10) ─ and the proposed plan for implementation ─ Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens - Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme; Brussels, 20.4.2010, COM(2010) 171 final ─ heavily stress citizens at headline level.


However, the HL Committee report indicates a heavy legacy of more effective repressive policy measures in the making, directed at illegal immigrants and failed asylum seekers, as well as (outside) plotters of terrorist acts.


Ever more draconian security measures tend to spill over unto EU citizens and legal migrants, and comparatively little seems to have emanated from fresh thoughts about the direct involvement and the extension of the legal ─ not to say political ─ rights of EU citizens.


Given the roots, is this the JHA agenda we need for the next five years?




Ralf Grahn

EU: Freedoms and justice or security? Call for materials

Few EU policy areas have as direct a bearing on citizens in the European Union (and outsiders) as justice and home affairs (JHA).

Time is running short for an informed public debate about major policy choices.


Do the next five years offer us EU citizens more freedoms and justice or ever increasing controls (security)? The implementation blueprint for the first five years under the Lisbon Treaty in the European Union’s area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ) is heading for final adoption in June 2010.

In a direct sense, the Action Plan, Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens ─Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme, is going to be the roadmap for future action by the European Union. Indirectly, potentially converging views at EU level may affect the thrust of justice and home affairs legislation and policies at national level.



Recap



The European Commission refers to document 17024/09 as the Stockholm Programme, whereas the Council seems to have replaced it by a new document 5731/10, without indicating the substitution or the reasons.



The Justice and Home Affairs Council has issued preliminary conclusions (8920/10) on the Commission Communication COM(2010) 171 final, the proposed Stockholm Progamme Action Plan. (See Grahnlaw: EU JHA Council Conclusions on Stockholm Programme Action Plan, 24 April 2010, as well as earlier blog posts on the Stockholm Programme.)



A week from adoption by the Commission, the Stockholm Programme Action Plan has now been posted visibly on Eur-Lex, under the latest COM documents made available. A few moments ago there were still only the three language versions we have mentioned and linked to earlier: English, French and German (with 20 official languages still missing less than two months ahead of final adoption).



Call for materials




In earlier blog posts, in addition to the basic documents, we have referred to contributions by Toby Archer (FIIA), Hugo Brady (CER), Tony Bunyan and Steve Peers (Statewatch), the House of Lords (European Union Committee) and others.

Now that the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force and the Stockholm Programme has been adopted, more is needed in order to achieve a borderless area of policy debate before the quinquennial landmarks are set in detail.

Dear Readers, please let us know about other relevant and timely materials.




Ralf Grahn

Comments on UK House of Commons Library Note SN/IA/3689

The Grahnlaw blog post EU materials: European Union terminology, procedures and sources 2010 (26 April 2010) recommended:




UK House of Commons Library Note: The European Union: a guide to terminology, procedures and sources (Standard Note SN/IA/3689; last updated 24 March 2010; 14 pages; authors Vaughne Miller and Emma Clark)


The authors - Vaughne Miller and Emma Clark - are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public, but this does not prevent me from discussing the Standard Note with the authors, by the means of this blog post.


Although the comments I make are personal and the preferences I mention are matters of (idiosyncratic) taste, some of the following might serve the next update of the Library Note.



Lisbon Treaty


The Library Note was published about a week before the latest consolidated version of the Treaty of Lisbon, so the rectified version was not available at the time. The Lisbon Treaty is presented in a readable and updated format, more officially:




Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83.


Since we are only months away from the entry into force, I find the “Lisbon Treaty” to be a convenient shorthand expression for the current state of primary EU law. This may change with the next accession treaty or at least the next substantial treaty reform, so the terms “EU law” and “EU Treaties” employed by the authors are not only correct, but more timeless.


When we need to be more specific, we can refer to the individual treaties:



Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), or the

Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)



EU Charter


The United Kingdom may have opted out, but at least the debate in English needs the latest version of the:



Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83/389



Euratom


Luckily, we now have a readable version of the Euratom or EAEC Treaty:



Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community; OJEU 30.3.2010 C 84



Member State


The authors discuss the use or not of capital letters.

Generally, I know that I shift not only from day to day, but often within the same blog post.

With regard to “member states” I prefer to write without capital letters, unless I quote EU documents, but this is only a matter of personal taste.



The European Council

The European Council, with the heads of state or government, is chaired by the President of the European Council, so part of the paragraph is outdated under the Lisbon Treaty.

The European Council does not exercise legislative functions, but it makes certain decisions based on the treaties (Article 15 TEU et al).



The Council of the European Union


There are now two Council formations (configurations) directly based on the TEU: the General Affairs Council (GAC) and the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) (Article 16 TEU).

The other Council configurations are adopted by the European Council (Articles 16 TEU, 236 TFEU; List of Council configurations, in OJEU 11.12.2009 L 325/51).



Legislation


The ordinary legislative procedure leads to legislative acts adopted by the European Parliament and the Council.

Then there are special legislative procedures (mainly Council legislation).

Commission legal acts are mainly delegated (implementing) acts.



Official Journal


Since the world is full of ‘Official Journals’, I prefer to use the abbreviation OJEU for the Official Journal of the European Union.

The same goes for the Court of Justice of the European Union, and here the authors use the abbreviation CJEU, as I do.


***

The comments may be exhausting, but they are not exhaustive. They are based on a brief tour of this Library Note, but I did not check all the questions.

Perhaps others can fill in, to make the next update even better(?)




Ralf Grahn

EU materials: European Union terminology, procedures and sources 2010

Much of the existing literature on the European Union was published before the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on 1 December 2009.

Outdated references to institutions, powers, procedures, legal bases, terms etc. tend to obscure the discussion on European Union affairs.

In the United Kingdom, the House of Commons Library does a great public service by producing Standard Notes on various subjects.

With regard to the European Union, I would like to draw attention to a Standard Note, which was updated recently, with the following aim:

This Note aims to clarify some of the terminology used to describe the institutions, laws and procedures of the European Union. It also provides links to useful sources of information on the EU.

UK House of Commons Library Note: The European Union: a guide to terminology, procedures and sources (Standard Note SN/IA/3689; last updated 24 March 2010; 14 pages; authors Vaughne Miller and Emma Clark)



Contents

1 Introduction 3

2 European ‘Community’, ‘Communities’ and ‘Union’ 3

3 The three ‘Pillars’ 4

4 EC law or EU law? 4

5 Treaty of Rome or Treaty of Lisbon? What to call the Treaty 5

6 Referencing Treaty articles 5

7 “Member State”: use of capital letters 5

8 European Council, Council of Ministers, Council of Europe 6
8.1 The European Council 6
8.2 The Council 6
8.3 The Council of Europe 7

9 European Courts 7

10 Legal instruments 7

11 Council and Commission legislation 8

12 The Acquis Communautaire 8

13 Official Journal 8

14 Legislative procedures 8
14.1 Ordinary Legislative Procedure 8
14.2 Consent 9
14.3 Consultation 9

15 Searching for EU legislation and documentation 10
15.1 Searching in Europe 10
15.2 Searching in the Member States 10
15.3 Searching in PIMS 10

16 Current information on the EU 11
16.1 Institutions 11
16.2 On-line news sources 12
16.3 Recent and forthcoming events 12
16.4 Addresses and telephone numbers 12

17 Reading List 13
17.1 General publications 13
17.2 European Union publications 13
17.3 House of Commons Library publications 13
17.4 Official Publications 14



In addition to Members of Parliament, this Standard Note is a most welcome reference for students of EU law and politics, as well as journalists reporting on European affairs.




Ralf Grahn

Calling European bloggers: Spread the word about My Europe Week

The editors of Bloggingportal.eu invite bloggers to participate in a blog carnival, by presenting their visions for the future of Europe between 3 May and Europe Day 9 May 2010, in the language of their choice.

You can submit a text or link to a post on your own blog.

But first the word has to be spread. We have a small beginning, but we need your help: more posts in more languages to make people aware of My Europe Week.

Here are the posts and languages I have noticed this far.



English




Stephen Spillane: My Europe Week – Celebrating Europe Day Online (19 April 2010)



Grahnlaw (in English): My Europe Week is about your vision for Europe (22 April 2010)



Mathew Lowry’s Tagsmanian Devil: What Europe do you want? The My Europe Week Blog Carnival is coming (23 april 2010)



Deutsch




Martin på Europaeum: Wer Visionen hat, sollte bloggen (20 april 2010)



Svenska



(bloggen.fi) Grahnlaw: Din vision för Europa: My Europe Week (23 April 2010)



Grahnblawg: Inför Europadagen: Din vision för Europa på My Europe Week (25 April 2010)



Suomi



Grahnlaw (blogs.fi): Sinun Eurooppa-visiosi: My Europe Week (23 April 2010)



Eurooppaoikeus: Kutsu blogikarnevaaliin: My Europe Week (25 April 2010)




Ralf Grahn


P.S. You can participate under the hashtags #MyEurope and #EuropeDay on Twitter.

EU JHA Council Conclusions on Stockholm Programme Action Plan

This blog post is about the EU JHA Council Conclusions on Stockholm Programme Action Plan, a crucial building block in the area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ).




The provisional Conclusions of the EU JHA Council meeting were published in English Friday evening:



3008th Council meeting Justice and Home Affairs, Brussels, 23 April 2010 (document 8920/10)



Stockholm Programme



The Commission JHA web pages refer to document 17024/09 of 2 December 2009 as the Stockholm Programme, here as a link through the website of the Swedish Council presidency and here as an earlier direct link to the document:

The Stockholm Programme – An open and secure Europe serving and protecting the citizens; Brussels, 2 December 2009; document 17024/09



However, in the 23 April 2010 Conclusions, the Justice and Home Affairs Council refers to document 5371/10 as the Stockholm Programme, without indicating the document(s) it replaces, if any:



The Stockholm Programme - An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens; Brussels, 3 March 2010; Council document 5731/10


With some attention to detail, the Council and the Commission could make life easier for readers.



Conclusions: Stockholm Programme Action Plan



In the Grahnlaw blog post EU JHA: Stockholm Programme Action Plan in English, French and German (24 April 2010) we linked to the three existing language versions of the Commission Communication COM(2010) 171 final.

(The Council has registered it as document 8895/10; 22 April 2010. The Communication has not yet been registered on the Legislative Observatory of the European Parliament, Oeil.)

By the way, the Commission Communication refers to the Stockholm Programme as: Council document 17024/09, adopted by the European Council on 10/11 December 2009 (page 2, footnote 1).

The Justice and the Home Affairs Ministers, or their substitutes during this meeting with reduced attendance, were given a presentation of the Commission’s proposal, which is meant to guide implementation of the Stockholm Programme.



The JHA Council conclusions (8920/10) indicate that the Council wants to influence the final version, and that final adoption is scheduled for June 2010 (page 8). Here is the text, including the typos:

ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTING THE STOCKHOLM PROGRAMME

Justice and home affairs ministers heard presentations by the Commission on its recommendations for an action plan implementing the Stockholm Programme (5731/10). Ministers welcomed the Commission paper, stressed, however, that the action plan should more closely mirror the objectives set out in the Stockholm Programme itself. The Council asked its preparatory bodies to swiftly start consultations on the action plan with a view to adopt the it in June 2010.

The Stockholm Programme is the multi-annual strategic work programme in the area of freedom, security and justice. It was adopted by the Council on 30 November 2009 and endorsed by the European Council on 10-11 December 2009. It sets out the priorities for EU action in the area for the next five years (2010-14). It puts the citizen at the heart of EU action and deals, among other things, with questions of citizenship, justice and security as well as asylum, migration and the external dimension of justice and home affairs.

It is ten years since the EU set itself the target of creating an area of freedom, justice and security. The Stockholm Programme will built on the progress made during the implementation of the Tampere Programme (2000-2004) and the Hague Programme (2005-2010).

But we are hardly much wiser as to the coming consultations.




Ralf Grahn

EU JHA: Stockholm Programme Action Plan in English, French and German

Earlier we linked to the English version of the Communication, which had been published. We have now been able to locate French and German language versions of the European Union’s Stockholm Programme Action Plan for justice and home affairs (JHA) 2010-2014. Thus, the three working languages of the European Commission are covered, but we still miss the text of COM(2010) 171 final in 20 official EU languages.



English



Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens - Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme; Brussels, 20.4.2010; COM(2010) 171 final



French



Mettre en place un espace de liberté, de sécurité et de justice au service des citoyens européens - Plan d'action mettant en oeuvre le programme de Stockholm ; Bruxelles, le 20.4.2010 ; COM(2010) 171 final



German


Ein Raum der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts für die Bürger Europas - Aktionsplan zur Umsetzung des Stockholmer Programms; Brüssel, den 20.4.2010; KOM(2010) 171 endgültig




Ralf Grahn

EU JHA Council: Stockholm Programme Action Plan

Ahead of the EU’s Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council today, 23 April 2010, in Brussels, the European Commission has issued a brief outline of the matters to be discussed:


Justice and Home Affairs Council: 23 April 2010 in Brussels (22 April 2010; MEMO/10/148)

The Stockholm Programme Action Plan, to be presented by the Commission, is still available only in English:



Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme (Brussels, 20.4.2010; COM(2010) 171 final; 69 pages).



Since there has been practically no opportunity for experts or the public to digest the proposed actions, we point out a few contributions of a more general nature, which we have not mentioned before.



Toby Archer


The Stockholm Programme had hardly been anointed by the European Council, when Toby Archer of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs published a briefing paper:



The Stockholm Programme: Europe’s next step to be an “area of freedom, security and justice” (Briefing paper 49; 15 December 2009; 7 pages)

Archer’s briefing paper is a good introduction to the development of the EU’s area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ), and to some of the sensitive issues affecting future work.



Hugo Brady

Hugo Brady, of the UK based think tank the Centre for European Reform (CER), gave a critical assessment of EU justice and home affairs, as well as the Stockholm Programme:



The seven sins of Stockholm (on CER website; published in E!Sharp magazineMarch/April 2010)



Tony Bunyan

In Tony Bunyan’s view the the values the Commission professes and the actions it proposes are at odds in the Action Plan:



Statewatch Analysis: Commission: Action Plan on the Stockholm Programme: A bit more freedom and justice and a lot more security (no date; 12 pages)




Ralf Grahn

My Europe Week is about your vision for the EU

The editors of Bloggingportal.eu have decided to call for personal visions of the future of Europe in the 21st century, under the theme My Europe Week.

From 3 May to Europe Day 9 May 2010 you can write a blog post on the new My Europe Week blog, set up by Stephen Spillane and with a logo designed by Martin of Europaeum.

Alternatively, you can link a post on your own blog to My Europe Week.

On Twitter you can follow the discussion under the hashtags #MyEurope and #EuropeDay.

Bloggers of Europe, unite … in diversity(?) Or was it adversity?




Ralf Grahn

EU JHA: Stockholm Programme Action Plan published in English

Yesterday we noted on Grahnblawg (in Swedish) the materials we were able to locate with regard to the Action Plan for the Stockholm Programme, the EU’s Justice and Home Affairs Programme for 2010-2014.

At the time, we did not find the Action Plan itself. We were perplexed by the Commission referring to the Swedish presidency web pages instead of the final version of the Stockholm Programme. Council document 5371/10 was headlined as the Stockholm Programme, but its meaning was left unclear.

Since then, we can take note of at least one improvement.

The European Commission has now published the final version of its communication COM(2010) 171 in English, in the newsroom of the Commission’s Area of freedom, security and justice (Justice and Home Affairs):



Delivering an area of freedom, security and justice for Europe's citizens Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme (Brussels, 20.4.2010; COM(2010) 171 final; 69 pages).


There are no indications yet about other language versions of this important document.



The Commission is going to present the proposed Action Plan to the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council meeting tomorrow, 23 April 2010, exceptionally meeting in Brussels in April (instead of Luxembourg).




Ralf Grahn

EU materials: House of Lords and Sweden

Legal acts of the European Union are not always from the master class of clarity. Especially first time readers often have a hard time understanding the meaning. There is a need for explanation and clarification, as well as evaluation outside the partly opaque processes leading to EU legislation.

Where to find help?




House of Lords



In the United Kingdom, we have the European Union Committee of the House of Lords, producing thoughtful reports on EU issues, evaluating important policy areas. But the patchy participation of Britain in EU activities influences the choice of subjects, and it affects the reasoning to a degree.

Where a fresh report of the HL European Union Committee exists, it is usually a valuable source for understanding the subject matter.




Sweden




Sweden is an EU member state somewhat more in line with the EU mainstream (exceptions: euro currency and NATO membership).

The Swedish government’s web design is exemplary. You can easily find the subject matters, and you can advance from web pages with brief information to detailed documents without a hitch.



You can access the document search for all types of publications from the front page, and the search function actually works (which cannot be said about many government or EU websites).

Sweden has a tradition of thorough preparation of legislation, including matters related to the European Union. Each step on the way is documented and accessible, from committee directives to updated legal acts.

Sweden has invested a lot of effort to make public communications, including official documents, clear and readable (“klarspråk”).


Without changing the intrinsic nature of the European Union, Sweden managed to set the gold standard for EU Council communications during its presidency, including the design of its website and the use of social media.


The main limit to the wider use of Swedish EU and general legal materials is the language. There are about 20 million native speakers of Swedish, Norwegian and Danish, able to read information in Swedish.

But it should not stop the European Union and member state governments from emulating and improving on Swedish style communications.




Ralf Grahn

EU Visa Code and Visa Handbook

Every year, millions of third country nationals come into contact with consular representations of the Schengen states in order to visit one or more of the 25 countries of common travel area. Some 10.4 million visas were issued in 2008.

In addition to the applicants (incoming travelers), the EU (Community) Visa Code affects friends, relatives and businesses in the Schengen states.


Officially it is called the Community Code on Visas, but with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon the European Community melted into the European Union (EU). Thus, we speak about the EU Visa Code, when we refer to:





REGULATION (EC) No 810/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code); published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 15.9.2009 L 243/1.


Visa Handbook 2010


Operational instructions on the practical application of the provisions of the Regulation 810/2009 have been drawn up in view of ensuring a harmonised implementation of these provisions.

Only the Bulgarian, Czech, Dutch, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish texts are authentic. [Not Danish, English or Irish.]

Ironically, at this time I was able to locate the fresh Visa Handbook only in English and two other working languages of the European Commission:




COMMISSION DECISION of 19.3.2010 establishing the Handbook for the processing of visa applications and the modification of issued visas; C(2010) 1620 final



DÉCISION DE LA COMMISSION du 19.3.2010 établissant le Manuel relatif au traitement des demandes de visa et à la modification des visas; C(1620) final



BESCHLUSS DER KOMMISSION vom 19.03.2010 über ein Handbuch für die Bearbeitung von Visumanträgen und die Änderung von bereits erteilten Visa; K(2010) 1620 endgültig


Perhaps the consular staffs and the public can expect to find the missing language versions published in the OJEU one of these days.




Ralf Grahn

Report on Sweden’s EU Council Presidency

The Swedish government has published a report on its presidency of the Council of the European Union during the second half of 2009 (in Swedish):



Regeringens skrivelse 2009/10:174 Redogörelse för det svenska ordförandeskapet i Europeiska unionens råd andra halvåret 2009 (31 March 2010; 69 pages).

This special report describes how the Swedish government prepared for the presidency and how it was put into practice. The main achievements are noted, as well as the costs.

Even if Sweden handled the last EU Council presidency under the old Nice Treaty rules, the report is valuable for future presidencies and students of EU politics. For instance, the text on Sweden’s successful web communications is worth noting.




General Reports



With pictures, charts and graphic design, the European Commission’s General Report on the Activities of the European Union 2009 has become shorter and lighter than its predecessors (132 pages), and the monthly Bulletin has been discontinued.

There are, of course, a plethora of special reports and news pages, but for a comprehensive view of the main events in the European Union, few beat the traditional annual general report of the Swedish government:



Regeringens skrivelse 2009/10:150 Berättelse om verksamheten i Europeiska unionen under 2009 (410 pages).

The Swedish annual report has become an even more valuable resource for those who know enough of a Nordic language to be able to read Swedish.



Ralf Grahn

Updated Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) published

We return to an old friend we have followed here on Grahnlaw. A codified (updated and readable) version of the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, in the official languages of the EU:




DIRECTIVE 2010/13/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (codified version); OJEU 15.4.2010 L 95/1.




For explanations you can go to the European Commission’s introductory web page Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), which offers a number of useful links (language alternatives: English, French and German).




Ralf Grahn

New EU Visa Code affects millions

On 5 April 2010 the new EU Visa Code became applicable, concerning short-stay visas (for 90 days). The Visa Code affects third-country nationals, who want to travel to the 22 EU states and the three non-EU members of the Schengen area, without internal border controls. More than 10 million visas were issued in 2008.

Of the EU member states Bulgaria, Cyprus and Romania have not yet made it into the Schengen zone. Ireland and the United Kingdom have chosen to remain outside.

The three non-EU Schengen member states are Iceland, Norway and Switzerland.

Here is a roundup of news reports and comments aimed at the general public:


BBC News: EU harmonises Schengen visa rules (5 April 2010)


Deutsche Welle: EU unveils improved Schengen visa application system (5 April 2010)


Radio Netherlands Worldwide: EU visa deal will ease travel for millions (6 April 2010)


EUobserver.com, Andrew Rettman: EU relaxes rules on short-stay visas (6 April 2010)


RTT News: EU Unveils New Visa Application System For Schengen Zone (5 April 2010)


Voice of Russia, Ilya Kharlamov: Schengen more transparent but not more accessible (5 April 2010)


Novinite.com: EU Streamlines Schengen Visa System (5 April 2010)



EU Commission



A press release, available in 22 languages, from the European Commission outlined the main changes: A step forward for the common visa policy: the EU Visa Code becomes applicable (IP/10/387; 30 March 2010).


MEMO/10/111 of 30 March 2010, published only in English, offered more exact details and references, including to the legal acts: The EU Visa Code will apply from 5 April 2010.




Ralf Grahn

Freedom to travel: Schengen long-stay visas

Third-country nationals legally residing in the Schengen area on the basis of a long-stay visa have been unable to travel to other member states during their stay or to transit through the territories of other (EU) member states when returning to their home country.

A new EU Regulation now extends the principle of equivalence between residence permits and short-stay visas issued by the Member States, fully implementing the Schengen acquis to long-stay visas. As a result, a long-stay visa should have the same effects as a residence permit as regards the freedom of movement of the holder in the Schengen Area.

A third-country national holding a long-stay visa issued by a Member State should therefore be allowed to travel to other Member States for three months in any six- month period, under the same conditions as the holder of a residence permit. The Regulation does not affect the rules regarding the conditions for issuing long-stay visas:



Regulation (EU) No 265/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 March 2010 amending the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement and Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 as regards movement of persons with a long-stay visa; published OJEU 31.3.2010 L 85/1.

The directly applicable Regulation 265/2010 entered into force on 5 April 2010.

The United Kingdom and Ireland do not take part in the new arrangement.




Ralf Grahn