| Author (Person) | Cronin, David |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.12, No.3, 26.1.06 |
| Publication Date | 26/01/2006 |
| Content Type | News |
|
By David Cronin Date: 26/01/06 Austria's EU presidency is hoping that it can break the impasse over a controversial plan for introducing EU-wide minimum safeguards for suspects in criminal proceedings this month. Under The Hague Programme, the EU's multi-annual agenda for justice and home affairs, a deal was supposed to have been clinched on the so-called procedural rights dossier by the end of last year. But the deadline proved elusive amid concerns that the proposal would clash with the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Published by the European Commission in May 2004, the proposal was designed to address concerns expressed about diverging national standards on guaranteeing a fair trial when EU governments agreed to introduce a European arrest warrant in 2001. Austria, current holder of the EU's presidency, is now seeking to restart the discussions when the Union's justice and interior ministers meet on 20-21 February. The proposal would need the unanimous backing of the EU's 25 member states to be approved. An Austrian diplomat said that this would probably be a "crucial meeting" for the dossier. While the diplomat said it was "very unlikely" that an agreement could be reached immediately, it was hoped a timetable for proceeding with the dossier could be drawn up. Insiders say that most member states have some concerns about possible clashes between the proposal and the human rights convention. An internal Council of Ministers document says that the key issue at stake is the relationship between EU powers in police and judicial co-operation and the obligations of EU governments as parties to the convention. Article 6 of the convention, for example, says that everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to be given detailed information "in a language which he understands" of the accusations being made. The procedural rights proposal, though, would grant discretion to the authorities of EU countries to decide on whether translation should be provided if a suspect does not understand any of the EU's 20 official languages. An EU official following the discussions said that there was a feeling among many member states that it might not be possible to harmonise procedural safeguards. While Belgium, Luxembourg and Portugal had been eager to achieve such harmonisation, others have argued that the issue was too fraught. This has been particularly the case in relation to terrorist offences, as countries which have witnessed terrorist attacks, such as the UK, Spain and Ireland, have far more stringent laws than those which have not. Dick Oosting, director of Amnesty International's Brussels office, said it was vital to have an EU system of procedural rights "not just because this was promised at the time the European arrest warrant was agreed, but because you need something to complement prosecutorial measures". Stephen Jakobi from Fair Trials Abroad said there was "a danger of running into a police state of Europe" if minimum safeguards were not introduced. Article reports that Austria's EU Presidency was hoping that it could revive the talks over a European Commission proposal of April 2004 which would introduce EU-wide minimum safeguards for suspects in criminal proceedings. The proposal was to be discussed at the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 21-22 February 2006. |
|
| Source Link | http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Justice and Home Affairs, Law, Values and Beliefs |
| Countries / Regions | Europe |
