Viviane Reding and EU Justice

Justice and Home Affairs affect citizens and businesses more directly than most EU policies, and there is a whole lot going on.

The Lisbon Treaty entered into force a year ago, and the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) now resembles 'normal' policies and internal actions of the European Union more than before.

The previous blog post looked briefly at Cecilia Malmström and EU Home Affairs, so now we take a peek at Viviane Reding and EU Justice.


EU Justice

Viviane Reding is vice-president of the European Commission and responsible for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship. Her Commission website is actively updated.

It took about six months, but then the Commission got separate Directorates-General for Home Affairs and Justice, both from 1 July 2010. However, they still seem to share the same culture. When I checked the Documentation centre and the Newsroom of DG Justice, they looked as lethargic as the corresponding web pages of their erstwhile fellow workers.

I wonder why.


JHA Council

Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) share the same Council configuration. The conclusions from the last meeting of this Council configuration during the Belgian presidency run to 37 pages, which gives us an indication of highly active policy areas:

Press release: 3051st Council meeting (Justice and Home Affairs), 2-3 December 2010 (provisional version; document 16918/10)

As with home affairs, there is a need for critical but constructive reporting and discussion about EU justice, fundamental rights and citizenship issues.


Citizenship report

I have been following EU citizenship issues on my blogs, so we might as well quote the Council conclusions with regard to the report from the Commission COM(2010) 603:

2010 EU citizenship report

The Council took note of the Commission's 2010 EU citizenship report: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens' rights (15936/10). The report analysis the areas where citizens are facing obstacles in the exercise of their rights and proposes 25 initiatives for tackling these obstacles.

You can find the initiatives in the blog post 'EU citizenship: 25 proposals' as well.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. 'The Blog with the European perspective' is how the team blog Kosmopolito describes itself; now closely following Wikileaks / Cablegate.

Cecilia Malmström and EU Home Affairs

The Lisbon Treaty entered into force a year ago, and the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) now resembles 'normal' policies and internal actions of the European Union more than before. Justice and Home Affairs affect citizens and businesses more directly than most EU policies, and there is a whole lot going on.


Home Affairs

Home Affairs commissioner Cecilia Malmström runs a fairly active blog in Swedish, Mitt Europa (My Europe), which adds a human touch to security and migration issues.

If you want information in English, you can turn to Malmström's home page at the European Commission, as well as the web pages of the new Directorate-General for Home Affairs (in action since 1 July 2010).

The commissioner keeps updating her web pages, but the Documentation centre and Newsroom of DG Home Affairs still seem lethargic.

Even the tip of the JHA iceberg is big, as you can see if you turn to the 37 pages of conclusions from the last meeting of this Council configuration during the Belgian presidency:

Press release: 3051st Council meeting (Justice and Home Affairs), 2-3 December 2010 (provisional version; document 16918/10)

One year since the Lisbon Treaty entered into force and half a year from the establishment of the DG Home Affairs, we can ask: How long will it take before media, politicians, officials, researchers, businesses and citizens outside specialist circles take notice?



Ralf Grahn



P.S. One of the best legal Euroblogs available is Kartellblog.de, where the attorney Johannes Zöttl writes in German about antitrust and merger control, but also about social media in a professional setting. Highly recommended.

Inquisition v. Giordano Bruno in EU area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ)?

My latest post about the conflict between the Council (member states) and the Commission regarding the EU's Stockholm Programme left me wondering if we should go back in order to move forward.


Lisbon Treaty at a tender age

For some background on EU justice and home affairs (JHA), you could read the following blog posts concerned with the Treaty reform stages which led to the Treaty of Lisbon: EU TFEU: Area of freedom, security and justice I (21 April 2008), EU TFEU: Area of freedom, security and justice II (22 April 2008) and EU TFEU: Strategic guidelines for freedom, security and justice (22 April 2008).


Solemn promises to EU citizens

The signing heads of state or government and the ratifying parliaments made the citizens of the EU a few solemn promises. They could not have placed the founding values, emphasising civil rights and freedoms, much higher than they are, in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (OJEU 30.3.2010 C 83):

Article 2 TEU

The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.

Already in Article 3(2) TEU they make a firm commitment, ”shall offer”:

Article 3(2) TEU

2. The Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime.

If you are interested in textual hierarchy, you may notice that this text precedes the establishment of an internal market, mentioned in paragraph 3.


AFSJ

The concrete provisions on the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) are found in Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), more precisely the Articles from 67 to 89.

While Article 67 TFEU lays down the general aims, Article 68 underlines the role of the European Council in setting the strategic guidelines for the AFSJ:

Article 68 TFEU

The European Council shall define the strategic guidelines for legislative and operational planning within the area of freedom, security and justice.

Back in April 2008 I wrote that the European Council was the most important institution of the European Union.The power to define the guidelines was hardly going to diminish this position, even if the official reason for the provision was (only) to codify existing practice, as when the Tampere Programme and the Hague Programme were adopted.


Criteria?

However, it would seem that the guidelines have to fulfil the criteria of the founding values and the area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured. These have been promised to the EU citizens. They are among the expectations of citizens in an objective sense, and EU action would have to be effective enough to attain the goals.

On the other hand, how binding are ”strategic guidelines” for legislative and operational planning?

Is the JHA Council the only authority of importance, when it wants to instate the strategic guidelines as the only guiding frame of reference for the political and operational agenda of the European Union in the Area of Justice, Security and Freedom [sic!]?

Who was right, the Inquisition or Giordano Bruno?

Update: Sorry, I missed providing a link to the Wikipedia article on the fascinating life of Giordano Bruno. For those who read Italian there is a brief biography by Anna Foa: Giordano Bruno (il Mulino).

Perhaps we have cause to look for a second opinion on what the Stockholm Programme should achieve.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. If you have to keep up with what the tribalists are doing, England Expects is one of the nicer ways to go about it. Written by the UKIP press officer Gawain Towler the blog is frequently updated, it is not devoid of humour and sometimes the EU institutions would be well advised to take its criticism to heart.

EU Stockholm Programme heresy?

Yesterday I wondered if EU theology needed to introduce the term ”limbo” to explain the whereabouts of the Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme (entry in Swedish; use Google translation and the sources in English or your own language if you are interested): Handlingsplanen för Stockholmsprogrammet: I limbo? (16 November 2010)

The Council of the European Union (Justice and Home Affairs) twice accused the Commission of deviating from scripture sacralised by the European Council (with the head of state or government from each member state). On the Commission's tracking system PreLex all traces of the proposed Action Plan are lost since 3 June 2010.

The Council was critical enough, but it failed to specify the issues which in its view went beyond the limits of the Stockholm Programme, or those questions which had not been addressed in a satisfactory manner. Thus, the Council conclusions do not meet adequate standards of openness, i.e. being readily understood by outsiders such as EU citizens, without extensive comparative study.

Accusations of heresy become grave matters when they emanate from the Inquisition, so instead of speeding towards the future, we need to go back to how the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) is doing, now that the Lisbon Treaty is in force.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Despite its English name, Diner’s room is a blog in French, where “Jules” writes about European and French law as well as politics. Don’t read Diner’s room if you have preconceived ideas about blogs being uncouth, and want to cling to your prejudices. Otherwise, feel free to enjoy well researched and argued posts on a quality blog.

EU: Progress in the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ)

One of the most important policy fields of the European Union (European Community), in addition to the original common market (later internal market), is the evolving area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ), in British parlance often referred to as Justice and Home Affairs (JHA).

Currently, it is split between intergovernmental police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, provided for by the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and other issues, treated in the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC).

The Treaty of Lisbon would achieve a degree of normalcy, by bringing the basic rules together under Title V Area of freedom, security and justice, more or less in line with other policy areas subject to ‘Community legislation’.

The AFSJ is relevant for EU citizens and third country nationals, and it is one of the most rapidly evolving policy areas, despite exasperating procedures for parts of decision-making.


***

European Parliament

The European Parliament has held its annual debate on the progress made in the area of freedom, security and justice.

By 313 votes to 56, with 6 abstentions, the European Parliament voted a resolution, which can be found in the provisional compilation of texts adopted Friday 24 April 2009.




The heading of the resolution is (on page 277):



P6_TA-PROV(2009)0329

Annual debate on the progress made in 2008 in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ)

European Parliament resolution of 24 April 2009 on the annual debate on the progress made in 2008 in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) (Articles 2 and 39 of the EU Treaty)


***


Resolution

The European Parliament states the support of EU citizens for European level action, and it notes the evolving character of the area of freedom, security and justice. But the EP also remarks on a number of obstacles to progress (at member state level).

***


Lisbon Treaty crucial

The European Parliament underlines the importance of the Treaty of Lisbon, with the following arguments:


Calls on those Member States which have not ratified the Treaty of Lisbon to do so as soon as possible, as it will overcome the more significant shortcomings in the AFSJ by:

– creating a more coherent, transparent and legally sound framework,

– strengthening the protection of fundamental rights by giving binding force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ('the Charter') and by allowing the EU to accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,

– empowering citizens of the Union and civil society by involving them in the legislative process and granting them greater access to the Court of Justice of the European Communities (ECJ),

– involving the European Parliament and national parliaments in the evaluation of EU policies, thereby making European and national administrations more accountable.


***

Stockholm Programme

After the Tampere Programme and the Hague Programme, the European Union is preparing its next five year programme for the development of the area of freedom, security and justice. It will probably be known as the Stockholm Programme. These are the greetings from the European Parliament to the Commission and the member states’ governments:


The European Parliament calls on the European Council, the Council and the Commission to:

(a) formally involve the newly elected European Parliament in the adoption of the next multiannual AFSJ programme for the period 2010-2014, as this programme, after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, should be mainly implemented by the Council and Parliament by way of the codecision procedure; given that such a multiannual programme should also go far beyond the suggestions contained in the reports of the Council Future Groups, national parliaments should also be involved as they should play an essential role in shaping the priorities and in implementing them at national level;

(b) focus on the future multiannual programme, and primarily on the improvement of fundamental and citizens' rights, as recently recommended by Parliament in its resolution of 14 January 2009 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union 2004-2008, by developing the objectives and principles laid down in the Charter, which the institutions proclaimed in Nice in 2000 and again in Strasbourg on 12 December 2007.


***

Citizens’ rights

The EP resolution contains a number of concrete requests for improvements with regard to EU citizens’ rights.

There is no doubt that the policy issues involved are important for individuals, both EU citizens and third country nationals, since they comprise:

Free movement of persons
Visa policy
EU external borders policy
Schengen area
Immigration
Asylum
Judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters
Drugs policy coordination
EU citizenship
Data protection
Fundamental rights
Racisim and xenophobia
Police and customs cooperation
Crime prevention
Fight against organised crime
External dimension of AFSJ
Enlargement from an AFSJ perspective




Ralf Grahn