| Author (Person) | Cronin, David |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.12, No.9, 9.3.06 |
| Publication Date | 09/03/2006 |
| Content Type | News |
|
By David Cronin Date: 09/03/06 The European Parliament will next week urge EU governments to intensify work on achieving a uniform set of rights for suspects in criminal proceedings. Under The Hague programme on justice and home affairs approved by the Council of Ministers in 2004, the governments should have approved a proposal for procedural rights in criminal trials by the end of last year. With that deadline missed, MEPs are calling on member states to prioritise the dossier, in order to boost confidence in the application of the European arrest warrant. French Socialist MEP Adeline Hazan, author of a report on the arrest warrant, described the procedural safeguards dossier as "essential in order to ensure a similar standard of legal protection for all European citizens". Her report, to be approved by Parliament's plenary session next week (13-16 March), argues that guarantees on rights are needed if the surrender of one member state's national to another member state is to be made easier. When publishing its proposal in 2004, the European Commission said that procedural safeguards were necessary to ensure mutual trust between the member states' differing legal systems. The proposal covers access to a lawyer before and during trial, access to an interpreter for those being tried in a language other than their own and steps for notifying defendants of their rights. But an internal Council paper says that several member states have questioned whether the proposal has a firm grounding in EU law. The Commission had put forward the proposal under a provision in the EU's treaty on "ensuring compatibility in rules applicable in the member states, as may be necessary to improve co-operation" in criminal matters. Ireland, Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Denmark and Malta "are not convinced" that this is the appropriate legal base, the paper says. There is also disagreement about the scope of the proposal. Finland has argued that trials relating to minor offences should not be covered, while the UK has sought clarifications about whether the proposal would extend to criminal proceedings involving the military. Austria is trying to broker a deal on the proposal in its role as holder of the Union's rotating presidency, despite reservations from its own government. An Austrian diplomat said that the matter would be discussed by justice and interior ministers next month but that it was too early to predict if they would come to a "definitive decision". Stephen Jakobi from Fair Trials Abroad said: "Rightly or wrongly, citizens have little or no confidence in foreign courts." He added that the only way to address this was through guarantees on minimum safeguards. Among the hurdles faced by the arrest warrant are rulings against it in Poland and Germany. In April 2005, a Polish court declared that the surrender of Polish citizens could not take place without a revision of the country's constitution. In July, the German constitutional court stated that the surrender of German nationals would not be possible until new laws were introduced. Article reports that the European Parliament was planning to urge EU governments to intensify work on achieving a uniform set of rights for suspects in criminal proceedings. The Council should have approved the proposed Framework Decision by the end of 2005. A report on the European Arrest Warrant, to be approved by Parliament's plenary session, 13-16 March 2006, argued that guarantees on procedural rights were needed if the surrender of one Member State's national to another Member State was to be made easier. |
|
| Source Link | http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Justice and Home Affairs |
| Countries / Regions | Europe |
