A safe Europe a priority Denmark has opted out of

The government of Denmark offers four wide headings as its priorities for the first six months of Council life in the European Union 2012:

A responsible Europe (see Grahnblawg in Swedish and Eurooppaoikeus in Finnish)

A dynamic Europe (see Grahnlaw in English and Eurooppaoikeus in Finnish)

A green Europe (see Grahnblawg in Swedish)

A safe Europe

As we see, A safe Europe is one of the four priorities of the Danish presidency of the Council of the European Union, and the one we have not looked at yet. The programme:

Europe at work: Programme of the Danish Presidency of the European Union 2012, 1 January to 30 June 2012 (61 pages)

The programme is available in Danish, French and German as well, through the presidency web pages.


A safe Europe

The presidency programme dedicates the pages 19-22 to the security theme. Many of the concrete issues are within three of the Danish opt-outs, namely defence policy, justice and home affairs and EU citizenship.

With only slight exaggeration we can say that a safe Europe is a Danish priority Denmark has opted out of.

Here are the questions covered by the safety priority:

Both wide and complex are the issues related to area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ), or often justice and home affairs (JHA) in British parlance, including cross-border crime, external security threats (terrorism), criminal proceedings, support for victims of crime, migration policy (integration), asylum (EASO), external borders (Frontex) and free movement across internal borders.

This section deals with food safety and cross-border health threats as well.

The risk of natural and man-made disasters requires both prevention and civil protection responses.

At the macro level EU enlargement (Copenhagen criteria plus absorption capacity mentioned) and the implementation of the neighbourhood policy of the union both in the east and the south are recalled in this respect.

Denmark wants to strengthen common representation of the EU internationally by the president of the European Council (Herman Van Rompuy) and the high representative (Catherine Ashton).

The programme wants to improve the link between the EU's humanitarian aid and long-term development programmes, striving to move towards a more global sustainable economy.

If there was anything about the need for a European defence, I must have missed it.

***

After the general part with the priorities, the presidency programme becomes more detailed when it turns to the main tasks of the different Council configurations (from page 23). Recommended reading for those who want to dig deeper in a specific area.



Ralf Grahn

EU permanent structured cooperation: operational military headquarters OHQ

After the UK veto against a permanent military headquarters for the European Union, is a new EU core taking shape through the establishment of permanent structured cooperation in the context of the common security and defence policy (CSDP)?

The British veto resulted in a letter from France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain to the EU high representative Catherine Ashton to explore ways to make progress.


Group of five

Bruxelles2 noted that the foreign ministers of Italy and Spain publicly confirmed that they adhere to the proposal by France, Germany and Poland to establish a military HQ for Europe. Following the UK veto, the new letter demands action from the high representative Catherine Ashton. According to Nicolas Gros-Verheyde, everyone knows that the counter-argument about duplicating NATO structures is rubbish: Le club des 5. Espagne et Italie rejoignent le trio de Weimar sur le QG européen (3 September 2011).

Interestingly, the Polish press release about the informal (Gymnich) meeting of the foreign ministers does nothing to enlighten us about the development of defence policy or the initiative by the group of five countries: Informal meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the EU Member States (undated).

On EUobserver, Andrew Rettman reported on the call for action: Group of five calls for EU military headquarters (9 September 2011)

The Spanish Europa451 website published an article with some details about the letter from the five countries – France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain – to the high representative Catherine Ashton: España y cuatro países piden crear un ejército europeo (9 September 2011).


Public Service Europe

Yesterday on Public Service Europe, Hylke Dijkstra argued that Europe needs permanent military capabilities to respond quickly to international events, while creating efficiencies for member states; in the blog post: Why the EU needs a military headquarters (12 September 2011).


Egmont

The ideas about an operational HQ have been around before the letter from France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain.

Sven Biscop and Jo Coelmont (Editors): Europe deploys towards a civil-military strategy for CSDP (Egmont paper 49, June 2011) suggested:

The EU could be the first to create a permanent civilian-military Operational Headquarters (OHQ), in Brussels, which could plan for and conduct both civilian and military operations and, allowing for close interaction with all relevant EU actors, could implement a truly comprehensive approach to crisis management.

SWP

Here is a description (in German) of permanent structured cooperation in the Treaty of Lisbon.

Christian Mölling described the only concrete security and defence policy reform of the Lisbon Treaty, in: Ständige Strukturierte Zusammenarbeit in der EU-Sicherheitspolitik (SWP-Aktuell 2010/A 13, Februar 2010, 4 Seiten).


Need for European action

With or without the help of the EU institutions and the national governments, there is the need for a truly European debate about the strategic defence choices concerning all citizens. Here are a few of my blog posts about the issues and the need for action.

Grahnlaw: EU military headquarters – CSDP permanent structured cooperation (9 September 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: Finland and non-aligned in EU: With UK or Europe on defence? (9 September 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: EU common defence: Military HQ first choice (10 September 2011)

Grahnlaw: Common European defence: some questions (10 September 2011)

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: Rejoice! EU CSDP transparency & European Year of Citizens (11 September 2011)

Grahnblawg (in Swedish): EU: JA eller NEJ till permanent strukturerat militärt samarbete? (12 September 2011)



Ralf Grahn

People hostile – eurozone doomed?

In the interest of its citizens, the European Union, or at least core areas such as the eurozone, need to become effective and democratic, but we are still waiting for the Copernican revolution among our national political leaders, who still ”own” the EU.

Without their leadership, many point out increasing hostility among populations towards the integration project of these leaders.

In some countries, the people have been forced to swallow the bitter pill.

In other states, they have been constrained to foot the bill.

Little wonder that there is animosity in the air. This narrows the margins for the governments, as long as they remain within the straitjacket of their own design.

Those who wish for the death of the euro currency and the demise of the European Union rejoice. Even if total victory may remain elusive, they can still hope for major gains, such as defaulting countries, the eurozone splitting, election losses for more or less pro-integration governments and increasing discontent.

As long as the conceptual and practical limits of democracy are set at the national level, the ill-wishers can evoke that they have the numbers on their side, in all or at least most of the countries.

Until this day, the domestic leaders have not redefined the battleground.

Perhaps it is too much to ask from the current heads of state or government with national mandates to show the same level of continental vision as the founding fathers of the USA did, when the thirteen former colonies were still small specks on the map of the East Coast.

Game-changing progress is seldom made by those who are a part or a cause of the problem. Profound political reform does not start by commanding majorities.

How many where the philosophers of the Enlightenment?

Europeans need security and prosperity in a global environment. Effective powers at the continental level need to be democratically legitimate at the same level.

I do not know how long it will take for these simple truths to sink in, or transforming leaders to emerge.

I am reasonably sure that core groups have to take the lead.

Still, there is no place for despair, only impatience.



Ralf Grahn

From Libya to Brazil, interior goes international (EU Justice and Home Affairs Council)

Only the first day conclusions were posted on the Consilium front page, but the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council was a two day meeting. For those who may have missed the conclusions by the justice ministers and ministers of the interior of the EU member states reflecting both days of the meeting, here they are:

3071st Council meeting Justice and Home Affairs; Brussels, 24 and 25 February 2011 (Council document 7012/11; 20 pages)

In the shadow of events in Northern Africa, especially the barbaric repression in Libya, and pressures from asylum seekers and unauthorised migrants in the Southern member states of the European Union, including a future readmission agreement with Turkey, some important, but less mediatic issues were on the agenda.

These other matters included the Internal Security Strategy (ISS) of the EU, attacks against information systems, jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I), the right to information in criminal proceedings, the migration of the EJN-network to the European e-Justice portal, remembering the crimes committed by totalitarian regimes in Europe, collective redress and the enforcement of court decisions in third countries concerning custody.

In the margins of the Council meeting, the Mixed Committee with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland discussed a number of issues related to the Schengen borders: the Schengen Information System II (SIS II), the Visa Information System (VIS), the 2011 work programme of the European border agency Frontex, the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen area, the Visa liberalisation process for the Western Balkans, visa waiver reciprocity and Canada's unilateral visa requirements for Czech nationals, and Liechtenstein's Schengen accession procedure.

Further, the Council concluded two visa liberalisation agreements with Brazil, adopted conclusions regarding the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, adopted conclusions about personal data protection in the EU, took note of a report about combating drug traficking from West Africa, adopted a decision to create a Subcommittee on Political Dialogue, Security and Human Rights with Algeria, decided to renegotiate a monetary agreement with Monaco, and decided to sign a fisheries agreement with São Tomé and Príncipe.


Interior goes international

A hefty agenda; just naming the issues, I almost ran out of breath.

It was also a wide-ranging agenda. As we saw, the issues ranged from Libya to Brazil, passing through Algeria, Canada, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, São Tomé, Switzerland, Turkey and the Western Balkans on the way, but they end up as justice and home affairs (in French: Justice et affaires intérieures, JAI) for the European Union and its member states.

Traditionally, justice and home affairs (freedom, security and justice, FSJ) were the essence of domestic politics and policies, but nowadays it is increasingly impossible to escape the need for rules and practices to deal with cross-border and international issues and aspects.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Charlemagne's notebook is one of the ”must read” blogs on European affairs, partly because its roots in the British soil.


P.S. 2: As an overview for those interested, here are the latest entries on my Euroblogs, three unilingual and one trilingual.

Grahnblawg (in Swedish): EU-rådet för allmänna frågor 21 februari 2011: Bedrövlig förhandsinformation

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland (in Swedish): EU-rådet för allmänna frågor: Vad gör Norden?

Grahnlaw: EU General Affairs Council (GAC) communication: Wrong, stupid and a missed opportunity

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland: EU cohesion policy conclusions reveal lack of transparency

Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish): Mitä EU:n alue- ja rakennepolitiikasta puuttuu Suomessa?

Grahnlaw Suomi Finland (in Finnish): Yhteisvastuu Euroopan unionissa: Kysyntää riittää


If you share my interest in the European economy, EU business, politics or law, we could get acquainted through Twitter @RalfGrahn or Facebook.

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.

“Romagate”: Did French government target Roma? And now?

We have seen an extraordinary war of words between the European Commission and a highly strung government of France. This has tended to obscure the real issues. Let us return to some of them.

Yes, historically France has made important contributions to human rights. With its universal values, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789) remains a milestone. The motto of the French Republic – Liberty, equality, fraternity – is also universal.

However, the Declaration did not prevent heads from rolling during the reign of Terror. Nor have later events always been free from attempts to corrupt these principles.

Through the European Convention on Human Rights and the founding values of the European Union, including the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the member states have assumed responsibilities – values and rules - to protect the rights of all people from the excesses of politicians.



Against this background, let us return to the speech by the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, which Vivien Sierens referred to on the Euros du Village blog for Les Européens du Grand Lille. (The date is wrong, but the link is genuine. I checked by going through the Elysée website directly.)



In Grenoble, 30 July 2010, after incidents concerning the public order, president Sarkozy announced a crackdown against criminals and unrest. Sarkozy announced the appointment of a new ‘préfet’ in the department to combat crime. The president listed a great number of security measures, but I have picked out only a few.

Sarkozy proposed that French citizenship be divided into two categories: irrevocable for citizens by birth and revocable for naturalised citizens. The speech did not elucidate what would happen with the stateless persons thus created:

De même nous allons réévaluer les motifs pouvant donner lieu à la déchéance de la nationalité française. Je prends mes responsabilités. La nationalité française doit pouvoir être retirée à toute personne d'origine étrangère qui aurait volontairement porté atteinte à la vie d'un fonctionnaire de police ou d'un militaire de la gendarmerie ou de toute autre personne dépositaire de l'autorité publique.

Controlled immigration of non-EU persons is naturally on the list, but also cutting public benefits and repatriation of illegal immigrants (excerpts):

Pour réussir ce processus d'intégration, il faut impérativement maîtriser le flux migratoire. Avec un taux de chômage des étrangers non communautaires qui a atteint 24% en 2009.

Nous allons donc évaluer les droits et les prestations auxquelles ont aujourd'hui accès les étrangers en situation irrégulière.

Je demande à Eric le Douaron, qui connaît bien le sujet en tant qu'ancien directeur de la PAF, de faire preuve d'une fermeté absolue dans la lutte contre l'immigration illégale. La règle générale est claire : les clandestins doivent être reconduits dans leur pays.

Against the background of cracking down on crime and illegal (non-EU) immigration, president Sarkozy went on to target illegal Roma camps and “abuse of the freedom of movement”, calling the return of migrants repatriated at state expense illegal:

Et c'est dans cet esprit d'ailleurs que j'ai demandé au ministre de l'Intérieur de mettre un terme aux implantations sauvages de campements de Roms. Ce sont des zones de non-droit qu'on ne peut pas tolérer en France. Il ne s'agit pas de stigmatiser les Roms, en aucun cas. Nous avons fait depuis la loi Besson de grands progrès pour les aires mises à leur disposition. Lorsque je suis devenu ministre de l'Intérieur en 2002, moins de 20% des aires de stationnement étaient prévues. J'ai fait le point avec le ministre. Aujourd'hui plus de 60% des aires de stationnement légales sont prévues. Les Roms qui viendraient en France pour s'installer sur des emplacements légaux sont les bienvenus. Mais en tant que chef de l'Etat, puis-je accepter qu'il y ait 539 campements illégaux en 2010 en France ? Qui peut l'accepter ?
J'ai vu que tel ou tel responsable politique disait : « mais pourquoi vous vous occupez de cela, le problème ne se pose pas ». Il ne se pose pas pour un responsable politique dont le domicile ne se trouve pas à côté d'un campement. Peut-être son opinion serait-elle différente s'il était lui-même concerné ?

Nous allons procéder d'ici fin septembre au démantèlement de l'ensemble des camps qui font l'objet d'une décision de justice. Là où cette décision de justice n'a pas encore été prise, nous engagerons des démarches pour qu'elle intervienne le plus rapidement possible. Dans les trois mois, la moitié de ces implantations sauvages auront disparu du territoire français.

Je souhaite également que dès l'automne prochain, nous réformions la loi applicable à ce type de situations. La décision d'évacuer les campements sera prise sous la seule responsabilité des préfets et leur destruction interviendra par référé du tribunal de grande instance, dans un délai bref. Nos compatriotes attendent que nous assumions nos responsabilités.

Parallèlement, je souhaite que nous engagions une importante réforme pour améliorer la lutte contre l'immigration irrégulière. Chaque année, une dizaine de milliers de migrants en situation irrégulière, dont des Roms, repartent volontairement avec une aide de l'Etat. Et l'année suivante, après avoir quitté le territoire avec une aide de l'Etat, ils reviennent en toute illégalité pour demander une autre aide de l'Etat pour repartir. Cela s'appelle « un abus du droit à la libre circulation ».

However, according to Simon Taylor writing for the European Voice, president Sarkozy yesterday made the following remarks about his government’s instructions and actions:

Referring to a internal memorandum leaked from France's interior ministry that instructed police to target Roma when clearing illegal camps, Sarkozy said the document “contained language which was likely to be misinterpreted”.

He said that as soon as he heard of it, it was replaced by a memo and that the new memo was already in circulation when Reding made her comments.

Did the French government target Roma? How is the new wording going to affect the actions on the ground?

You are the jury.




Ralf Grahn

EU JHA: Stockholm Programme officially published

Justice and home affairs (JHA) was an area where the Lisbon Treaty brought about significant changes, introducing the ordinary legislative procedure into judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation. (See December 2009 summary by the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union.)

In addition, the European Union’s emerging area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ) has a direct bearing on EU citizens.

During 2010─2014 we are going to see a lot of legislative activity, outlined in the Stockholm Programme.

We now have a new and final reference to the Stockholm Programme, published in the Official Journal of the European Union in the official languages:




The Stockholm Programme — An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens; OJEU 4.5.2010 C 115/1.


The official publication of a final and agreed text should free us from one minor annoyance, when recently the European Commission referred to the Swedish Council presidency pages or to document 17024/09, whereas the JHA Council used a new reference, document 5731/10, without explanation.



Next step


The JHA Council plans to adopt the proposed Stockholm Programme Action plan in June 2010, before the end of the Spanish presidency of the Council of the European Union.

The Communication (proposal) by the European Commission under discussion:



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



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




Ralf Grahn

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

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

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

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

Trust is good, control is better? US & EU at a crossroads

In the Lisbon Treaty preamble the member states of the European Union confirmed their attachment to the principles of liberty, democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and of the rule of law. The EU shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice, according to Article 3(2) TEU.

“Trust is good, control is better”, has been ascribed to V. I. Lenin, not our first choice among icons of liberty. However, these words seem to encapsulate the purported defence of our freedoms, by elected governments on both shores of the Atlantic.



From data retention of all electronic communications and nudie pics at airports to spying on bank data, nothing is to be left unseen by the US administration and the European Union, in the name of our security.

Security is important, but are our administrations driven by fear? Is any level of control ever sufficient to eliminate all threats?

What happened to liberty, human rights and fundamental freedoms?

“We have nothing to fear but fear itself” would be a better motto for our leaders than the vain pursuit of total control.




Ralf Grahn

EU Network and Information Security (NIS) resolution officially published

In the blog post EU Network and Information Security (NIS) (27 December 2009) we presented the Council resolution and detailed preparatory work by the Commission, mentioning that the annexed resolution would be published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU), but that in the meantime we followed the Council document.


OJEU


Adhering to the principle to use the most authentic and official sources available, we can now announce the official publication of the Council resolution on NIS, which forms the tip of the iceberg:



COUNCIL RESOLUTION of 18 December 2009 on a collaborative European approach to Network and Information Security, published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 29.12.2009 C 321/1.



NIS reasons


At the same time, we can repeat some of the reasons for the importance of NIS action noted by the Council:

II. NOTING THAT:

1. Given the importance of electronic communications, infrastructures and services as a basis of economic and social activity, Network and Information Security (NIS) contributes to important values and objectives in society, such as democracy, privacy, economic growth, the free flow of ideas, and economic and political stability;

2. Information and communication technology systems, infrastructures and services, including the Internet, play a vital role for society, and their disruption has the potential to cause huge economic damage, underlining the importance of measures to increase protection and resilience aimed at ensuring continuation of critical services;

3. Security incidents risk undermining user confidence. While severe disruptions of networks and information systems could have a major economic and social impact, everyday problems and nuisances also risk eroding public confidence in technology, networks and services;

4. The threat landscape is evolving and growing, which increases the need to provide end-users, businesses and governments with electronic communications infrastructures that are robust and resilient by default and to identify the right incentives for the providers to do so in a timely manner;

5. There is a need to enhance and embed Network and Information Security in all policy areas and sectors of society, and to address the challenge of ensuring sufficient skills via both national and European actions and raising awareness among users of information and communication technology (ICT);

6. The completion and functioning of the Internal Market will require that network owners and service providers cooperate across borders, given that possible disruptive events in one Member State may also affect other Member States and the EU as a whole;

7. New usage patterns, such as cloud computing and software as a service, put additional emphasis on the importance of Network and Information Security;

8. Network and Information Security serves the objective of all parties, in all sectors of society, to be able to trust the information systems, therefore a cross-sector and cross-border approach is needed;

9. With the increasing use of ICT in society, Network and Information Security is a prerequisite for the reliable, safe and secure delivery of public services, such as e- Government;

10. ENISA has the potential to build on the important role it already plays in Network and Information Security.

Ralf Grahn



P.S. Read Coulisses de Bruxelles, by Jean Quatremer, and other great euroblogs listed on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu, our common “village well” for fact, opinion and gossip on European affairs.

EU Network and Information Security (NIS)

Have we humans always got our priorities right? If Santa Claus gets a parking ticket for his reindeer, it is front page news around the globe. But without information and communication technologies (ICT) in working order, even that news item would go nowhere. Actually, very little would function in our modern world without secure networks and information.



The 2987th Council meeting, in the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy (TTE) configuration from 17 to 18 December 2009 (document 17456/09), adopted a resolution on network and information security (NIS), a brief mention on page 22:

Network and Information Security

The Council adopted a resolution on a collaborative European approach on network and information security (15841/09).

The resolution responds to the Commission's communication on this subject (8375/09), whose objective is to develop an EU policy on the protection of critical information infrastructure.

Secure information infrastructure got a three line mention, when the Swedish Council presidency summed up the results of the meeting for general consumption.

I am not out to criticise the brief mentions: They are geared towards the interests of the public, and most of the time we seem to look for more immediate pleasures, leaving critical, but “boring” work to specialists.



Resolution details



Council document 15841/09 Council Resolution on collaborative European approach on Network and Information Security – Adoption (dated 8 December 2009; 11 pages) recalls the establishment of the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA; Regulation 1007/2008 amending Regulation 460/2004) and initiatives to protect Critical Information Infrastructures (CIIs).

The annexed resolution will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU), but in the meantime we follow the Council document.

Among other things the Council underlines that (page 6):
A high level of Network and Information Security in the EU is needed in order to support:

a. the freedoms and rights of citizens, including the right to privacy;

b. an efficient society in terms of quality in information handling;

c. the profitability and growth of trade and industry;

d. citizens’ and organizations’ trust in information handling and ICT systems.

The resolution stresses the need to modernise and reinforce ENISA, and it invites the EU member states to undertake continued efforts to improve network and information security, including by creating Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs).

The Commission is invited to support the efforts of the member states, for instance by evaluation and a possible NIS strategy.

ENISA is encouraged to work with all stakeholders, and these to put their best foot forward.


Commission communication



The basic underlying document was the Commissions Communication on Critical Information Infrastructure Protection "Protecting Europe from large scale cyber-attacks and disruptions: enhancing preparedness, security and resilience"; Brussels, 30.3.2009 COM(2009) 149 final (12 pages).



The Communication was accompanied by the Staff Working Document: Summary of impact assessment; Brussels 30.3.2009 SEC(2009) 400 (8 pages).




The full length Impact assessment SEC(2009) 399 came in three parts (addenda): Part 1 (Council document 8375/09 ADD 1; 149 pages), Part 2 (ADD 2; 133 pages) and Part 3 (ADD 3; 130 pages).



Preparation and hierarchy


We are able to see that a few vague sentences in the press releases from the Council and the Swedish presidency are just the tip of the iceberg.

The resolution itself is more detailed, although the phrases still resemble indistinct wishes for constructive action, as often is the case when we deal with cooperation and coordination between sovereign states.

Even when there is need for urgent action, herding 27 member states is a slow and laborious task, often spanning several Council presidencies.

The base of the iceberg is the preparatory work by the Commission, carefully researched and documented, often voluminous. Nosemonkey often stresses how incredibly dull the European Union is.


Few of us have cared to follow this far. We just expect our computers, networks and European Union to function, so that we can see if Santa wins the appeal against his parking ticket. We are all too human.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Get to know Jon Worth’s Euroblog and other great European blogs listed on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu, our common “village well” for fact, opinion and gossip on European affairs.

EU Stockholm Programme background: Area of freedom, security and justice

The 2979th session of the Council of the European Union ─ Justice and Home Affairs configuration ─ starts in Brussels on Monday, 30 November 2009, under the Treaty of Nice, and continues on Tuesday, 1 December 2009, when the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force.



Although much of the Lisbon Treaty (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115) tweaks the institutions, without affecting citizens directly, justice and home affairs (JHA), the area of freedom, security and justice (FSJ), is a policy area where the reforms will have impact on individuals (through secondary legislation).



Detailed view

For a more detailed view of the treaty provisions in force from 1 December 2009, you can look at Part three, Title V of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Articles 67 to 89 (pages 73 to 84 in the consolidated, readable version of the treaty).

The legislative history of each Article has been presented on this blog, with further references to relevant materials.



Essential background



For the reader, who wants an introduction or a quick recap of the Lisbon Treaty reforms, the Fondation Robert Schuman prepared ten fact sheets available in French and English (December 2007). Here the relevant one is Sheet 6: The Lisbon Treaty and the area of freedom, security and justice (2 pages).



The Swedish presidency of the Council of the European Union has published a brochure for the general public (available in Swedish and English): A more secure and open Europe ─ The priorities of the Swedish Presidency for the Justice and Home Affairs Council (8 pages).



Barroso II Commission



On Friday, 27 November 2009, president-elect José Manuel Barroso allocated the portfolios for the commissioners proposed by the member states. Subject to the approval of the Commission as a body by the European Parliament, Cecilia Malmström will be responsible for home affairs in the Barroso II Commission and Viviane Reding will be in charge of justice, fundamental rights and citizenship during the next five years.

Most countries have separate ministers of the interior and ministers of justice. The responsibilities of the European Commission are both expanding and evolving. Politically, these issues are delicate; they concern individuals and striking the right balance between rights and repression is one of the most demanding tasks in modern government. The expected creation of two Commission portfolios has been favourably received.



JHA Council



Some progress has been made in opening up EU Council proceedings to the public. Generally, the Swedish presidency has been the best to date in presenting meetings and materials in a comprehensive manner to the public, as well as in its more open attitude with regard to publishing documents.

Public deliberations and debates are slowly making inroads into closed, smoke-free rooms. The press briefing for the JHA Council tells us that there is going to be a public deliberation (general debate) on the Stockholm Programme on Monday, under home affairs (page 2). On Tuesday, under justice, there is going to be a public debate (presumably on these parts of the draft programme).



Press conferences and public deliberations can be followed by video streaming on the Council’s audiovisual web page.



On the EU Council’s website, you can find background material for the 2979th JHA Council meeting 30 November to 1 December 2009: revised presidency briefing, agenda, background note, audiovisual note, public debates and deliberations 30 November, and public debates and deliberations 1 December.



Stockholm Programme



After the Tampere programme and the Hague programme, the European Union is about to adopt its third long term framework for its work in the area of freedom, security and justice: the Stockholm programme 2010-2014.

The JHA Council prepares the ground for the 10 to 11 December 2009 European Council, where the heads of state or government will adopt this framework of strategic value.



The Swedish presidency has published a second draft of the Stockholm Programme ─ An open and secure Europe serving and protecting the citizens (23 November 2009, document 16484/09; 73 pages).




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Do you find EUSSR myths fascinating? Are we EU citizens worth a better European Union? Educate yourself! There are already 487 Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. You can access all the posts on the Posts page, or concentrate on the editors’ choices on the Home page. On most of the blogs you can comment and discuss our common European future.

House of Lords on EU Stockholm Programme

The European Union Committee of the House of Lords has published a short report The Stockholm Programme: home affairs ─ Report with evidence (9 November 2009; HL Paper 175; 32 pages).

Since the purpose of this post is just to highlight the publication, here is a quote on the background of the Stockholm programme and the contents of the report:

“On 10 June 2009 the Commission published a Communication to the European Parliament and the Council entitled “An area of freedom, security and justice serving the citizen”. This was considered at an informal JHA Council on 16–17 July 2009. The Swedish Presidency has prepared a draft of a new five-year programme—the Stockholm Programme—based on the Commission Communication, and this is likely to be approved by the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 30 November, and adopted by the European Council on 10–11 December 2009. This programme will then form the agenda for EU justice and home affairs legislation from 2010 to the end of 2014.

In this brief inquiry, conducted by Sub-Committee F,3 we have looked only at the home affairs content of that Communication.

With the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon all third pillar matters will, instead of requiring unanimity among the Member States, be adopted by qualified majority voting in the Council and codecision with the European Parliament. Virtually all initiatives under the Stockholm Programme will then apply to the United Kingdom only if the Government opt in.”

***


The area of freedom, security and justice (usually justice and home affairs in British parlance) develops rapidly, contains interesting conflicts between freedoms and security aspects and it will become more of a normal EU policy area under the Lisbon Treaty (with regard to police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters).


The House of Lords reports on EU affairs are usually worth reading.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. Read about the real EUSSR through the Euroblogs aggregated on multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Propose an interesting blog post or a whole new blog (click Contribute).