Long arm of the law becomes longer

Date: 01/10/1998

On the day when the convention formally setting up Europol comes into force, Simon Coss reports on the police agency's tortuous birth, the role it will play in combating crime and the practical problems it still faces.

EUROPE finally has its own police agency, but anyone hoping for the Union to have a law enforcement body rivalling the United States' powerful FBI is in for a disappointment.

Although certain legal issues still need to be ironed out before it can start working at full strength, the convention formally setting up Europol entered into force today (1 October).

But even when it is fully operational, Europol will only employ some 350 full-time staff and its main role will be to coordinate operations between the Union's national police forces. There will be no 'Eurocops' running around the Union in blue uniforms emblazoned with yellow stars for some time to come - if ever.

“We won't get a European FBI in the near future. That's neither necessary nor possible. In Europe we have no common penal code, no common police law, no common police force. It's unthinkable that Europe will harmonise in these areas in the near future and that's why we at Europol need to work in a more flexible way,” explains the agency's head, Jürgen Storbeck.

Unlike the FBI, Europol cannot launch or run investigations on its own initiative. Instead the agency, which is based in The Hague, has to play what is essentially a supporting role to law enforcers in the Union's 15 member states.

“We can't give orders. If you want to cooperate you have to convince, not try to direct,” says Storbeck.

Europol's operating costs for this year amounted to some 6.8 million ecu, with a further 2.1 million spent on new computer equipment for the agency. In 1999, its budget will increase by 70&percent;, reflecting the widening role it is expected to play in the future.

One of the agency's new tasks, for example, will be to take on criminals who try to forge euro banknotes and coins when they are introduced in 2002.

Despite the fact that the Europol convention only came into force today, the agency has been carrying out many crime-fighting activities over the past four and a half years.

The Europol Drugs Unit (EDU) began work following a special agreement between the Union's justice and home affairs ministers in 1993.

At that stage, it was only mandated to take part in investigations into drug smuggling. However, in the years that followed, its remit was widened significantly to include activities such as money laundering, illegal trafficking in nuclear and radioactive material, clandestine immigration networks, vehicle smuggling and child pornography.

Indeed, the EDU already has what it considers to be some notable successes under its belt. These include the recent 'Operation Cocktail' drugs investigation which was launched in response to a request from law enforcement officials in Sicily. Europol's role in the inquiry involved coordinating cross-border surveillance of the main suspects, assembling information from Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, and calling for national investigations to be launched.

When member state police forces were ready to make arrests, warrants were issued for 70 suspects and raids were carried out in 12 towns and cities in five EU countries.

The European Commission has always argued that an agency such as Europol is necessary in the Union to tackle cross-border crime - a phenomenon it regards as an unfortunate but unavoidable consequence of the single market.

“Cross-border crime often results from free trade,” explains Anita Gradin, the Commissioner responsible for justice and home affairs policy.

Officials working for her argue that without the sort of cross-frontier police cooperation Europol is designed to foster, the only people to benefit would be lawbreakers. “Criminals love national sovereignty. It means that when they run over the border, the police stop,” said one.

For the past two years Gradin has badgered Union governments to ratify the convention allowing Europol to begin working properly, repeatedly chiding national administrations for what she saw as unacceptable foot-dragging over the issue.

“Her message is 'get it ratified',” said one Gradin aide at the height of the Commissioner's crusade.

The Europol Convention was signed by EU leaders at their summit in Florence in 1996 after a sustained bout of diplomatic wrangling over the European Court of Justice's role in mediating in disagreements over differing national interpretations of the text.

The UK argued that as the convention had been drawn up between governments under the Union's justice and home affairs rules, the Court had no business getting involved. The argument was eventually settled when London won the right to opt out of any possible ECJ rulings.

However, this was only the beginning of the story. Justice and home affairs rules also state that all conventions must be individually ratified by each of the Union's 15 national parliaments.

The Belgian parliament, the last legislature to carry this out, completed the process in June of this year, paving the way for the agency to launch its operations.

However, Europol is not totally ready to get to work. Storbeck admits, for instance, that the three huge databases which form the heart of the agency's operations will not be fully operational until the turn of the century.

“The database will be a semi-automatic system until the year 2000,” explains the Europol supremo. “Until then people will have to continue working through our agents.”

The fact that the databases will not be fully online for at least another two years is quite a serious drawback for Europol.

Ratification of the convention was supposed to herald a great advance in enabling police forces in EU member states to have instant access to information on the agency's files.

This was not possible before ratification as the European rules on access to information and data protection needed to carry out such operations were included in the text of the convention.

The delay in completing work on the databases means that, in the short term, police forces are unlikely to notice a great deal of difference between working with Europol and their experiences in the old EDU days.

Other issues also need to be ironed out before the agency will be able to function at full capacity.

Key amongst these is the question of how Europol will be authorised to take part in investigations into alleged terrorist offences. While EU governments have agreed that, in principle, the agency should in future be allowed to participate in such inquiries, its exact role is still not clear.

The issue is particularly sensitive because, in some member states, terrorist investigations are primarily the responsibility of military rather than police authorities. EU officials hope a final solution to this problem will be found early next year.

There is also concern in some quarters about how secure the Europol files will be.

Particular worries have been raised over plans for the agency to exchange information with police forces in the central and eastern European countries currently lining up to join the Union. “However sophisticated a network is, it's only as good as its weakest link,” said one diplomat recently.

Other critics have raised the spectre of Mafiosi gaining access to information on people who have informed and embarking on bloodthirsty sprees of revenge killings.

These concerns have been compounded by the arrest last year of a Belgian lawyer who was caught selling confidential data held on the Schengen free movement zone's central computer to criminal gangs.