Member states reluctant to cede policing powers

By Judith Crosbie

Date: 08/06/06

The European Commission and the European Parliament are putting pressure on member states to allow police and judicial matters to come under the scope of a new EU Fundamental Rights Agency.

The issue will come up during a meeting this Friday (9 June) between the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of Ministers and at a Parliament plenary session to be attended by the Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security Franco Frattini on Monday (12 June).

It may also go before foreign ministers meeting early next week (12-13 June) in Luxembourg and EU government leaders gathering at the end of the week.

Some member states have opposed allowing the agency competence over policing, security and counter-terrorism matters, which fall under the EU's third pillar on justice and home affairs. Under this, decisions are taken by member states with a lesser role for the Commission, the Parliament and the European Court of Justice.

The UK in particular questions the legality of the move. "We've had some legal advice and it's not a problem with the substance [but]...there isn't a strong enough legal base," said a UK spokeswoman.

Member states have insisted that the initial scope of the agency should stop at first pillar on community law, which in this context would cover discrimination and racism. After that a second phase to expand the agency's scope could see the addition of policing, security and counter-terrorism.

But both Parliament and human rights groups have opposed this, saying that it would render the agency meaningless.

"I can't even imagine this two-step approach, the issue has to be clear," said Hungarian centre-right MEP Kinga Gál who is drafting Parliament's view on the issue.

A fundamental rights agency without scope to scrutinise policing and security matters would be so weak it "wouldn't make a dent in a pat of butter", said Dick Oosting, director of Amnesty International's EU office.

Claims that the agency should keep away from these topics because it would overlap with the work of the 46-member Council of Europe are dismissed. "The Council of Europe carries out its functions but it can't add teeth," said Oosting. "The issue is not about reporting, what's missing is enforcement and implementation."

Oosting warned that the creation of a rights agency without such elements would hurt the EU's credibility. "If it is so in denial about its own shortcomings it will undermine its international standing and look like it's going after the US," he said.

The Parliament and human rights groups have also been calling for the agency to have scope over member states' breaches of democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights, as spelled out in the Treaty of Nice, but, given the problems in including policing and security matters, this is not likely to figure prominently in forthcoming discussions.

The idea for the agency was first proposed by member states in December 2003 to analyse and collect data on how each EU member state adheres to the basic rights enshrined in the EU's treaties.

Article reports that the European Commission and the European Parliament were putting pressure on EU Member States to allow police and judicial matters to come under the scope of a new EU Fundamental Rights Agency. Opposing Member States argued that the initial scope of the agency should stop at first pillar on community law, which in this context would cover discrimination and racism and should not include third pillar issues of justice and home affairs.

European Commission: DG Justice, Freedom and Security: Fundamental rights: Fundamental Rights Agency http://ec.europa.eu/comm/justice_home/news/consulting_public/fundamental_rights_agency/index_en.htm

---