Denmark closes ranks on IGC deal

Date: 27/02/1997

By Rory Watson

and Ole Ryborg

A CLEAR shift in Danish government policy has increased the chances of a Union deal to strengthen the EU's ability to guarantee the free movement of people and tackle international crime.

After months of increasing isolation on the issue in the Intergovernmental Conference, Denmark is now ready to jettison one of the special opt-outs it won at the Edinburgh European summit five years ago and join ranks with almost all other EU member states.

The change in Copenhagen's stance could pave the way for agreement within the coming weeks on one of the most delicate areas in the IGC negotiations.

It will also increase pressure on the UK, which now stands alone in arguing that sensitive asylum, visa and immigration issues should continue to be handled by governments without interference from the European Commission, Parliament or Court of Justice.

In an attempt to speed up agreement on EU rules to consolidate an area of freedom, security and justice within Union borders, the Dutch presidency this week presented foreign ministers with a virtually complete draft of treaty articles on judicial and police cooperation.

Putting flesh on the bones of the version tabled late last year by the Irish presidency, the Dutch text specifically notes that “a large majority of delegations” want the participation of all EU institutions in the free movement of people and directly related flanking measures to prevent criminals from taking advantage of the absence of border controls.

To ease the transition from intergovernmental cooperation towards fully fledged Union programmes, the Dutch government has suggested the changes could be introduced in stages.

During an initial period, member states would share the right to table draft legislation with the Commission and all decisions would be taken unanimously. Later, the Commission would have exclusive responsibility for proposing new measures and policies would be agreed by majority voting.

At the same time, the role of the ECJ would become more limited in this area to prevent a log-jam caused by the large number of asylum and immigration cases which might otherwise find their way to Luxembourg.

The UK is, however, continuing to hold out against such developments. British Foreign Secretary Malcolm Rifkind told his EU counterparts this week that his government remained resolutely opposed to any greater involvement by other EU institutions in judicial and police matters.

But in an apparent softening of tone, he indicated that the UK, while keeping its frontier controls, might be interested in cooperating in certain areas of the Schengen border-free convention.

However, the recent change of heart in Denmark has left the UK without any allies in its opposition to the changes on the intergovernmental negotiating table.

Further evidence of the shift in Copenhagen's stance came from Danish Foreign Minister Niels Helveg Petersen when he indicated in Brussels this week that he would try to negotiate a twin-track solution for his country in the IGC negotiations.

This strategy is designed to ensure that any rejection in a Danish referendum of the proposed changes would not sabotage implementation of the revised Maastricht Treaty by the EU as a whole, as it did in 1992.

One referendum would allow Denmark to decide whether to participate in whatever supra-national arrangement emerged from the IGC on asylum, immigration and visa issues. Another would specifically ask whether voters endorsed or rejected the revised treaty as a whole.

The shift in policy appears to be supported by public opinion. A recent poll in the Danish daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten indicated for the first time that 60&percent; of those surveyed believed existing restrictions on police and judicial cooperation should be lifted. Even among traditionally more reluctant Social Democrat voters, the figure was 53&percent;.