| Author (Person) | Cronin, David |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.9, No.41, 4.12.03, p24 |
| Publication Date | 04/12/2003 |
| Content Type | News |
|
By David Cronin Date: 04/12/03 SHOULD England and Germany face each other during the Euro 2004 tournament, it's a safe bet the pre-match speculation will be devoted as much to the prospect of violence off the pitch as to the tactics of the teams on it. The riots that erupted when the two sides met at Charleroi in Belgium during Euro 2000 have served to put football hooliganism at the heart of the EU's mushrooming justice and home affairs agenda. As part of efforts to prevent trouble at Euro 2004 in Portugal, or the 2006 World Cup in Germany, the Council of Ministers adopted a resolution on hooliganism on 17 November. This suggests that supporters who are banned from a stadium in one member state could then be banned from attending matches in other EU countries. The move follows an analysis on hooliganism undertaken earlier this year at the behest of the Council's working group on police cooperation. It raised fears that fans intent on wreaking havoc would try to travel to Portugal, masquerading as tourists. "This tournament will take place in a country that appeals to holidaymakers, while the neighbouring country, Spain, also attracts many tourists," the working group noted. "It is expected that the participating countries will have to make great efforts to trace high-risk fans, or to prevent them from travelling to the matches." As well as international fixtures, the paper examined the potential for trouble between clubs with a history of fierce competition. It cited the tense relationship between Leeds United and Turkey's Galatasaray, and between Dutch club FC Den Bosch and Belgium's Standard Liège as examples of possible flashpoints. EU officials say the resolution is intended to provide guidelines to member states, rather than lay down compulsory measures. It advocates that "in order to ensure compliance with orders imposing stadium bans, member states should supplement them with provisions for penalties in the event of non-compliance". But it is less specific on what kind of measures could be envisaged than a paper prepared by Italy's EU presidency during the summer - that document mentioned preventive detention as a possibility. (At present, only Germany, Greece and Portugal resort to this for football-related offences.) Because it is non-binding, the resolution belongs to the category of "soft law". Nevertheless, some civil liberty campaigners believe it could be used as a pretext to introduce unduly repressive measures, which do not actually lead to an effective onslaught on hooliganism. Their worries are based on experience. For example, in the run-up to Euro 2000, the Netherlands (which co-hosted the tournament with Belgium) introduced special legislation to give the police powers to arrest anyone who they suspected may cause trouble, without needing any corroborating evidence. Belgium also introduced fast-track legal procedures which became known as snelrecht (fast law). However, the fact that only one of the 750 England fans arrested in Belgium was convicted of hooliganism led many to query the effectiveness of the procedures. Tony Bunyan, editor of civil liberties online bulletin Statewatch, wonders if it is appropriate for measures on hooliganism to be envisaged for the entire EU, when the bulk of trouble-makers appear to hail from just four of the current 15 member states. This view is supported by Council of Ministers' data showing that in 2002, Italy had 2,011 stadium bans in place, the UK 1,440, Germany 1,368 and the Netherlands 1,008. The remaining 11 EU countries accounted for 68 bans between them. "One can understand that someone who is convicted of serious violent behaviour, or of racism, might be targeted and might not be allowed to enter a country or a football match," says Bunyan. "But if somebody got drunk and faced a stadium ban - should it mean they should never be able to travel to any match? I think that's highly debatable." Bunyan also regards as tokenistic a reference in the 17 November resolution to how the compilation of lists of people facing stadium bans must not undermine national and international data-protection law. So far there has been no real discussion about what redress those who feel they have been banned without justification will have. Checks and balances are necessary, he believes, given past experiences. In 1995, the European Commission decided that both the UK and Belgium should remove the names of two Welsh brothers from police records. The fans' names were put on the football hooliganism index at the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) in London in 1990 when they were questioned by police in Luxembourg while on their way to see a game involving the Welsh national team. (The information was passed on to the NCIS by a Belgian officer who was liaising with the Luxembourg authorities.) The Commission found that the European Court of Justice has ruled that the free movement of people can only be hindered on public order grounds if "the person concerned represents a real and sufficiently serious threat affecting a fundamental interest of society". Bunyan, a passionate supporter of north-London club Arsenal, says that rather than introducing ill-conceived measures, the EU should be concentrating on stamping out racism at football grounds. The idea of fining clubs or even removing them from competitions if they fail to take action against racist abuse by their fans should be considered, he believes, expressing outrage that Arsenal captain Patrick Vieira was fined by UEFA, the governing body for European soccer, when he publicly chastized it of being lax in its attitude to racism. Vieira's complaint was raised after he and team mates were subjected to racist abuse when they played Spanish side Valencia during a Champions' League in March. Nevertheless, the stadium manager at Leeds United's home ground, Elland Road, describes the idea of having an EU-wide system of stadium bans as "right and proper". Harry Stokey adds: "I personally think football clubs should be made responsible for their supporters." He explains that Leeds has an agreement with West Yorkshire police that those arrested at Elland Road, or at incidents before or after a game, can be registered as having committed "football-related" offences. In addition, Leeds, in common with many Premiership clubs, has trained stewards to detect violent or offensive behaviour by fans, including the chanting of slogans which are "foul, abusive, racist or homophobic", he says. Up to 500 stewards can be on duty at home games, while several also go to away matches to monitor supporters. Nevertheless, racism continues to rear its ugly head in matches across Europe - not least because players themselves have been known to abuse opponents in a bid to provoke them into committing a bookable or sending-off offence. Organizations such as Football Against Racism in Europe (FARE) are spearheading the fight against this cancer in the game. The network, which links 70 supporter clubs, anti-racist initiatives and migrant and ethnic minority organizations from 18 European countries, was presented with a special award in October by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in recognition of an outstanding contribution to combating racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism. The award was collected by German television presenter Anthony Baffoe, a former Bundesliga player and Ghana international. The General Affairs Council adopted a Resolution on 17 November 2003 on the use by Member States of bans on access to venues of football matches with an international dimension. This suggests that supporters banned from a football ground in one Member State could then be banned from attending football matches in other Member States. |
|
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Culture, Education and Research, Justice and Home Affairs |
