Member states unable to agree on suspects’ rights

No agreement has been reached on a long-debated plan to introduce a minimum set of standards for suspects ahead of next week’s Justice and Home Affairs Council (12-13 June).

Despite hope that a compromise could be reached at the last meeting of ministers in April, no solution has been found. Anger at the small number of states opposing the proposal has prompted the German presidency to make the debate among ministers next week public, to force recalcitrant ministers to explain their positions. Member states against the proposal (the UK, Ireland, Cyprus, Malta, the Czech Republic and Slovakia) are also opposed to other states adopting it through enhanced co-operation, which needs a minimum of eight states, EU diplomats said.

These states question the European Commission’s legal right to introduce such legislation and say that the European Convention of Human Rights already covers the rights of suspects.

A compromise suggested by the German presidency of the EU would have allowed the proposal to cover suspects transferred between member states under the European arrest warrant. Member states wanting a broader scope covering all suspects could have gone further, with those opposed opting out. But this idea was not accepted.

"It’s now more a question of principle than of content," said one EU official.

The lack of agreement is a blow for the German presidency and the Commission, which have been pushing for proposals giving citizens rights, following various pieces of legislation with a perceived oppressive agenda. But some member states are unimpressed by this reason for the proposal.

"This is a public relations exercise where they have to be seen to be doing something on the other side. But we have the European Convention on Human Rights, that’s why we have never needed anything like this," said one diplomat.

The UK in particular is being targeted. "The presidency is applying political pressure…they have really painted the UK as the target with the thinking that if they change their position the others might follow," said another diplomat.

But there are fears that the proposal could conflict with the Convention on Human Rights. In particular, some fear it could cause confusion over whether cases should be brought before the European Court of Justice, in Luxembourg, which adjudicates on EU law, or the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights, which adjudicates on the Convention on Human Rights.

The European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA) disagrees with this assessment. "From the ECBA experience it is clear that the European Convention on Human Rights is not enough. The Strasbourg court is creaking under the weight of cases brought against member states. Rather than this court of last resort what was needed was an instrument to make convention rights more visible in each and every member states," said Han Jahae, chairman of the ECBA.

But some member states say that problems in reaching compromises on justice issues should await the outcome of discussions on a new EU treaty. This is expected to extend qualified majority voting to a swathe of justice matters.

"Why are German ministers rushing at fences when [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel is trying to solve the bigger picture?" asked a diplomat.

No agreement is expected next week on a proposal to set down safeguards for data held by law enforcement bodies, though a discussion is expected. Immigration will also be discussed, with a Commission proposal to sanction employers who hire illegal workers to be debated. The German presidency will get agreement on a plan to allow the exchange of DNA, fingerprints and vehicle registration numbers between member states, though a part of the plan allowing police to cross borders into other member states to "avert immediate danger to life or limb" has been dropped.

No agreement has been reached on a long-debated plan to introduce a minimum set of standards for suspects ahead of next week’s Justice and Home Affairs Council (12-13 June).