| Author (Person) | Spinant, Dana |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.10, No.10, 18.3.04 |
| Publication Date | 18/03/2004 |
| Content Type | News |
|
By Dana Spinant Date: 18/03/04 A PAPER due to be discussed today (18 March) by member states' ambassadors in Brussels strongly criticizes the way the EU has implemented the anti-terrorism action plan launched in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks in New York and Washington. The paper, drafted before last week's attacks in Madrid, strikingly points to "blank spots in identifying certain transport infrastructure which may be targeted by terrorist attacks, such as metro stations, train stations, rail or road crossings". It criticizes the lack of an "EU anti-terrorism approach to transport" and attacks the Union's failure to put forward security measures on railways and roads. The text points to gaps on "implementation of what has already been agreed", which "has been slow in some areas". It cites the case of the European arrest warrant, which is still not fully operational, as five member states have not transposed it into national law. The warrant would allow for the swift transfer of terrorist suspects from one member state to another. In addition, a number of existing measures and legal instruments "are poorly used or poorly understood by law enforcement and judicial authorities" in some EU states, it says. For instance, although the EU is now entitled to freeze terrorist organizations' financial assets, there are very few groups "whose assets can be frozen in practice". The paper also denounces gaps in intelligence-sharing between member states. Meanwhile, the European Commission and member states are on a collision course over who should be in charge of coordinating the Union's anti-terrorist activities, European Voice has learned. While Javier Solana, the high representative for foreign affairs, is set to defend, in a series of meetings ahead of next week's EU summit, a plan to appoint a special envoy on terrorism responding to member states, Romano Prodi would prefer a "commissioner for terrorism". The Commission president and his entourage are said to believe that much of the instruments to fight terrorism are under the so-called first pillar, or Community pillar, in which the Commission has wide-ranging powers. In a paper due to be presented to member states' officials today, the Commission points out that many measures to clamp down on terrorism fall within its area of responsibility. Although the paper does not state it explicitly, a Council official claims the text implies that the Commission, and not the Council "or some new holder of a new job at the Council" should be in charge of coordinating the anti-terrorist agenda. But Commission officials say there is a split within the College, between Prodi and António Vitorino, the justice and home affairs chief. "He [Vitorino] does not want any new post, he would not readily ask for a terrorism commissioner," one official involved in justice and home affairs said. "He insists implementation of the action plan which has already been agreed, and not new structures, posts or policies are missing to make the EU effective against terrorism." A paper discussed at a meeting of the Permanent Representatives' Committee (COREPER) on 18 March 2004 strongly criticises the way the European Union has implemented the plan of action to combat terrorism launched following the terrorist attacks in the United States on 11 September 2001. |
|
| Source Link | http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Justice and Home Affairs, Security and Defence |
