Spanish threat may set a costly trend for IGC

Date: 07/03/1996

MADRID and Brussels are slowly moving towards a consensus to end the extradition dispute triggered by Belgium's refusal to send two suspected Basque ETA militants back to Spain on the grounds that their alleged offence was politically motivated.

Preparing for the meeting of justice and home affairs ministers on 19 March, experts from EU governments have tentatively agreed that, in future, no Union judiciary should be allowed to turn down another member state's request for the extradition of a suspect charged with serious terrorist crimes.

The move comes in the wake of the bitter dispute which erupted after the Belgian government refused to extradite a suspected ETA militant and his wife charged with providing shelter and logistic support to an armed ETA commando accused of killing a policeman. Belgian judges ruled that the country's law did not allow for the two to be extradited.

That prompted dire warnings from Spanish Foreign Minister Carlos Westendorp that Spain would block the ratification of the results of the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference if no solution to the problem was found.

The preliminary consensus reached by government experts, which still needs clearance at ministerial level, would be enshrined in the convention on simplified extradition procedures that the Italian presidency still hopes to conclude before the EU summit in June.

Spain's stand, linking agreement on extradition to ratification of the IGC, is likely to be maintained by the new Conservative-led government that should emerge from the recent Spanish elections. Diplomats say the new government can hardly afford to be more flexible than its outgoing Socialist predecessor, as the Partido Popular has taken a tough line on the country's separatist movements in the past.

The Spanish threats have fuelled fears that the IGC's already complex negotiation process may be seriously impeded by a flurry of such potentially-conflicting demands, delivered as ultimatums by governments or parties vying for maximum media effect.

German Social Democrats recently uttered a similar threat to block ratification of the IGC if governments fail to agree on new measures to boost employment in the EU.

The dispute between Belgium and Spain also highlights the difficulty of getting the EU's cooperation on judicial and home affairs to work properly, as the need for an efficient Union-wide policy clashes with traditional legal and constitutional provisions which national parliaments are understandably reluctant to change.

In some instances, these provisions enshrine civil liberties that have defined a country's policy towards refugees and asylum-seekers for a century and more.

Thus, the Belgian law granting immunity from extradition to those committing politically-motivated crimes dates back to the 19th century and made the country a safe haven for prominent refugees such as Karl Marx and Victor Hugo.

The deal now being worked out between governments - which would need parliamentary approval - would allow Belgium and other EU member states which acknowledge the existence of politically-motivated crime in national law to retain such provisions.

But political motivation would no longer be considered a valid reason to reject extradition requests from EU governments for suspects charged with serious terrorist crimes, as defined in Articles 1 and 2 of the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism. These include the hijacking of aircraft, hostage-taking, kidnapping, crimes directed against or threatening human lives, and complicity in such criminal activities.