eunbil · GT0N1597 · 2006-07-14 00:00:00 — Improvement of judicial cooperation between MS and courts Establishing causal links between the interventions and outcomes and impacts will be problematic Rules on procedures Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters (I 44/2001) To harmonise national rules of conflict of jurisdiction To simplify procedures for recognition and enforcement of judgements from rules (Source: MS reporting to Commission) Simpler and quicker procedures to recognise and enforce the judgements Length of time taken to recognise and enforce the judgements (Source: MS) Better and quicker access to Prevent conflict of jurisdiction Clear intervention logic Regulation on taking evidence in civil and commercial matters (1206/2001) To improve, simplify and speed up procedures for taking evidence between the courts of different of facilitated cross-border procedures between courts in different MS for taking evidence (Source: MS reporting to Commission) Quicker and more efficient judicial procedures Length of time taken to take evidence between courts (Source: MS) Better and quicker access to intervention logic. Regulation on the service of documents in civil and commercial matters (Regulation 1348/2000) To increase efficiency and speed in judicial procedures To improve and expedite the transmission of documents between of common rules on transmission of judicial and extrajudicial documents between MS(Source: MS reporting to Commission) Quicker and more efficient judicial procedures Length of time taken to transmit the documents and enforce judgements (Source: MS) Better and quicker access to Quicker judicial procedures Clear intervention logic. Directive on legal aid in cross-border disputes (Council Directive 2003/8/EC) To guarantee adequate level of legal aid in cross-border disputes through establishing minimum common standards between common standards relating to legal aid in cross-border disputes (Source: MS reporting to Commission) Adequate levels of legal aid in cross-border disputes (Source: MS) Improved access to , especially of vulnerable groups Clear intervention logic. Resolution of cross border disputes European payment order (forthcoming) To reduce the costs and time taken to make payments. To increase the number of cross-border orders for payment Implementation Numbers of cross-border orders for payment made Reduction of intermediate procedures Reduced costs and time of litigation in cross-border cases concerning uncontested pecuniary claims. Improved access to . Facilitated recovery of cross-border debts Establishing causal links between the interventions and outcomes and impacts will be problematic. Proposal yet to be adopted. European enforcement order for uncontested claims (Regulation 805/2004) To enable quick and efficient enforcement of an uncontested claim between of applications of European enforcement order in (Source: MS) Quicker and more efficient enforcement of uncontested claims in another MS Length of time needed to enforce such a claim (Source: MS) Reduced costs and time in such cross-border cases Improved access to causal links between the interventions and outcomes and impacts will be problematic Instrument on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) To reduce the costs of dispute resolution To facilitate recourse to mediation by improving legal certainty Implementation possibilities and better awareness of possibilities for ADR attempts to use ADR Reduced costs of dispute resolution disputes resolved without going to court Establishing causal links between the interventions and outcomes and impacts will be problematic Instrument on small claims To facilitate cross-border access to for small claims To reduce the costs and time taken to resolve small claims. To increase the number of legitimate small claims made. Implementation Application of Small Claims Procedure in the 25 (Source: MS) Increased number of small claims pursued. (Source: MS) small claims resolved. Increased legal certainty. Increased access to . Proposal yet to be adopted. Marriage and divorce law Instrument on maintenance obligations To improve and simplify enforcement procedures of maintenance obligations. To enhance cooperation. To clarify what is applicable (non-conflicting) law Implementation Application of Regulation in maintenance obligations proceedings in 25 (Source: MS) Reduction of intermediate procedures. Reduced cases of forum shopping Increased cooperation between legal professionals / competent authorities in the Member States (Source: MS) Increased legal certainty Mutually recognised decisions acted upon/ enforced. Facilitated recovery of debts (maintenance for creditors) Instrument is at the Council discussion stage. Establishing causal links between the interventions and outcomes and impacts will be problematic. Evaluation requires good data from the Member States. Regulation on jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgements in matrimonial matters and parental responsibility (II, 2201/2003) To harmonise rules of jurisdiction To enable automatic recognition and enforcement of judgements between of harmonised rules on jurisdiction (Source: MS) Quicker and more efficient recognition and enforcement of judgements Length of time taken to recognise and enforce a judgement MS) Better access to Better protection of citizens in case of divorce Facilitated visiting rights for parents Better protection of childrens rights Evaluation requires good data from the Member States. on the conflict of laws in the area of contractual obligations (I). To reduce costs associated with differences regarding non-contractual obligations To increase party autonomy and flexibility To increase legal certainty for consumers and internal market Implementation Numbers of cross-border disputes settled Application of conflict of law rules in the MS (Source: MS) Improved mutual trust between judicial authorities (Source: MS) Facilitated mutual recognition of international contracts Proposal in discussion stage. Proposal for a regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (II, COM(2003) final) To harmonise rules on non-contractual obligations To increase legal certainty Implementation Provision of a set of community rules Application of rules in the MS (Source: MS) Improved mutual trust between judicial authorities (Source: MS) Increased legal certainty for victims of damages and perpetrators of torts Reduced legal uncertainty. Reduced costs of accessing causal links between the interventions and outcomes and impacts will be problematic Regulation on insolvency proceedings (1346/2000) To improve efficiency and effectiveness of cross-border insolvency proceedings To prevent shopping for a more favourable legal position Implementation Provision of a set of community rules Application of rules in the MS (Source: MS) efficient and effective cross-border insolvency proceedings Prevention of shopping for a more favourable legal position Time taken for proceedings Perceptions of shopping amongst legal professionals (Source: MS, surveys) Better access to Reduced costs of accessing Better resolution of cross border insolvencies Better cooperation between courts and administrators of insolvency Clear intervention logic Directive on compensation to crime victims (2004/80/EC) To facilitate better access for victims to compensations where crime was committed in another MS To establish a compensation mechanism in such cases Implementation Co-operation mechanism between MS set up (Source: MS) Better access to compensation to victims of crimes in cross-border situations (Source: MS) Better access to Better compensation for victims of cross-border crime in Europe Clear intervention logic Policy sub-area 2: Criminal matters () Objectives: To promote mutual recognition To increase confidence and other conditions leading to mutual recognition To reduce differences in the definition of crimes. In particular, to explore common definitions and procedures for human trafficking and cross border crimes To reduce differences in detention and trial procedures To improve taking of evidence To reduce differences in penalties To speed up cross border arrest and surrender procedures To facilitate cross border management, freezing and confiscation of criminal assets To protect victims of crime Policy sub-area level indicators: Number of mutually recognised judicial decisions Extent of mutual confidence: proportion of officials in national administrations who have high confidence in other MS systems (measured by surveys of national authorities) Level of awareness of judicial actors of other MS systems Number of definitions of crimes approximated Number of reduced differences in detention and trial procedures and definition of penalties Length of cross-border arrest and surrender procedures Size of criminal assets frozen and confiscated in cross-border cases Source: instrument (and type of instrument) Objectives Implementation at national level Indicators/evaluation questions Specific issues /comments Immediate results Outcomes Impacts European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (Council Framework Decision of 13 2002on arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (2002/584/JHA)) To facilitate and expedite surrender procedures in respect of persons wanted for trial and sentenced persons between Member States Transposition Numbers of arrest warrants issued, executed and refused Numbers of persons surrendered and of persons received from other Member States and numbers of persons consenting to surrender. (Source: MS) Faster and simpler surrender procedures Average duration of surrender procedures (Source: MS) Increased visibility of mutual recognition, better knowledge of each other"s judicial systems and increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. Increased security and safety within the EU Requires good data from MS. MS must actively participate in evaluation. Instrument on the execution of orders freezing property or evidence (Council Framework Decision 2003/577/JHA of 22 2003) To facilitate recognition and execution of freezing orders issued by a judicial authority of another Member State Transposition Number of freezing requests issued and executed (Source: MS) Increased efficiency and effectiveness of freezing orders Faster procedures to freeze assets Increased use of procedures to freeze assets Increased speed of national procedures as a consequence of freezing order Improved access to evidence obtained/ Improved recovery of assets (Source: MS) Increased efficiency of procedures; increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. Decreased levels of organised crime (Source: Europol reports) Requires good data from MS. Instrument on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties (Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005) To facilitate the enforcement of financial penalties imposed by judicial or administrative authorities in a other than the State in which the penalties were imposed. Transposition Number of decisions and issued and executed (Source: MS) Faster and more effective procedures to ensure enforcement of financial penalties Average length of procedures (Source: MS) Dissuasive effect to potential criminals and decreased level of financial crime Increased visibility of mutual recognition, better knowledge of each other"s judicial systems and increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. Requires good data from MS. Difficult to measure causal links between outcomes and impacts Instrument on the exchange of information extracted from the criminal record (Council Decision 2005/876/JHA of ) To improve exchanges of information on criminal records between Member States Voluntary compliance Number of requests sent , number of replies sent -for the purpose of criminal proceedings, and - for other purposes (Source: MS) Improved knowledge available to sentencing authorities about the convicted person"s full European criminal record. Improved circulation of information on criminal records for other purposes (e.g. employment) Improved quality of information on criminal records from abroad in the of nationality (Source: MS) Dissuasive effect to potential criminals and hence decreased levels of crime Increased visibility of mutual recognition, better knowledge of each other"s judicial systems and increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. appropriate and better informed sentencing decisions Requires good data from MS. Difficult to measure causal links between outcomes and impacts Instrument on the standing of victims in criminal proceedings (Council Framework Decision of 15 2001) To assist victims before or after criminal proceedings Transposition Application of rules the instrument (Source: MS) Better information for victims on legal advice and on their rights, protection for vulnerable victims and more appropriate methods of obtaining evidence Improved situation for victims in relation to criminal proceedings (Source: MS) Raised awareness of victims" rights amongst practitioners Measured by MS surveys Better access to good data from MS. Framework programme on and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (AGIS) Help legal practitioners, law enforcement officials and representatives of victim assistance services from the EU Member States and Candidate Countries set up Europe-wide networks, exchange information and best practices. Encourage Member States to step-up co-operation with the applicant countries and other third countries Commitments to AGIS projects Participation Number of activities promoting training and expert mobility Number of dissemination activities Number of conferences and seminars Number of studies, research and evaluations (Source: Commission) Development of instruments, strategies and activities for cooperation Development of methods, techniques and instruments for operational and training use Exchange and dissemination of information, experience and best practices (Source: Commission) Improved operational procedures and approaches Cross-border use of good practices Mutual understanding of respective , legal and administrative systems Common perception of criminality Transnational cooperation activities normally require qualitative approaches to evaluation taking account of varying contexts. Flanking measures in place (Joint Action of 29 1998 adopted by the Council) To improve judicial cooperation between Member States through direct contacts between judicial authorities Designation of national contact points Regular meetings, creation and updating of specific tools (website, "fiches belges", atlas and legal glossary) Number of cases in which the EJN is involved. (Source: EJN and Member States) Increased efficiency of procedures and better communication between judicial authorities. Average duration of procedures, analysis of outcomes of proceedings, perceptions of ECJ as a communication tool EJN and Member States) Improved functioning of mutual recognition instruments, better knowledge of each other"s judicial systems and increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. Eurojust (Council Decision of 28 February 2002) -ordination of investigation and prosecution of serious cross-border crime Appointment of national experts to Eurojust Immediate access to information about legal systems from a practitioner of the nationality of the Member States in question. Measured by: number of cases where Eurojust is used of the coordination role. of Eurojust as a potential arbiter of conflicts of jurisdiction. of Eurojust as peporting authority for problems with European Arrest Warrants. (Source: Eurojust and MS) Increased efficiency of procedures and better communication between prosecutors and judicial authorities. Average duration of procedures, analysis of outcomes of proceedings (Source: Eurojust and MS) Increased cross border prosecution rates and improved efficiency (evidence gathering, mutual information exchange on procedural matters) Improved functioning of mutual recognition instruments, better knowledge of each other"s judicial systems and increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. (Council Framework Decision of 13 2002) To facilitate, expedite and improve investigations in cross border cases Transposition Setting up of joint investigation teams Number of cases investigated by such teams (Source: MS) Efficient gathering of evidence in cross border cases Average duration of cross-border case reaching the court (Source: MS) Increased range of judicial cooperation tools. Improved functioning of mutual recognition instruments, better knowledge of each other"s judicial systems and increased mutual confidence between judicial authorities. Horizontal instrument for both Sub Policy area 1 (Civil matters) and Sub Policy area 2 (Criminal matters) Judicial training To improve knowledge of relevant EU instruments among legal practitioners To enhance mutual understanding of legal systems among judges and prosecutors To co-ordinate national judicial training programmes To promote better language skills among European legal practitioners Participation in training activities activities Measured by: Training programmes offered, number of participants benefiting from training on EU matters ) (Source: Commission. Participant feedback) In evaluating the success of this policy, regard must be had to the effective use of available EU funding. Increased number of judicial training activities, increased coordination between national judicial training programmes, development of . Quality of training activities, number of participants in exchanges Improved knowledge of European and international instruments amongst judges and prosecutors (Source: with law enforcement and judicial actors) Increased understanding of mutual recognition Promotion of a European judicial culture. POLICY AREA: AND PREVENTION OF AND FIGHT AGAINST GENERAL ORGANISED CRIME Factors influencing evaluation mechanism: Policy based on the TEU Title VI (third pillar). Activities include legislation, including the approximation of crimes and penalties and cooperation measure. Establishing causal links between the EU interventions and the ultimate objective of reducing crime is always likely to be problematic. The current factsheet intends to facilitate the assessment of the implementation of EU instruments in this area. Full fledged evaluation will require substantial improvements in the quality and availability of statistical information in the field of crime and criminal . The forthcoming Action Plan in this field (to be adopted by the Commission in 2006) will address these issues and put forward concrete proposals, including carrying out an inventory and setting-up an expert group. In this context, this factsheet and the indicators included therein will necessarily be adjusted and improved in the light of the implementation of the Action Plan, and could be used as a starting point for discussions in this field. Policy sub-area 1: Crimes and Sanctions (i.e. legislation to fight organised (cross border) crime and terrorism) Objectives: Smuggling and trafficking of human beings, Sexual exploitation, racism and xenophobia, Financial and economic crime, Illicit trafficking in goods, Organised crime and cyber crime. To reduce the financial resources available to those involved in organised crime To criminalise and passive corruption Policy sub-area level indicators: Numbers and trends of successful prosecutions for (Source: UN crime and criminal trends surveys, European sourcebook of criminal statistics, Commission crime and criminal statistics): Smuggling and trafficking of human beings, Financial and economic crime, Illicit trafficking in goods (including firearms), Numbers of successful prosecutions for organised crime (Source: UN crime and crime trends surveys, European sourcebook of criminal statistics, Commission crime and criminal statistics) Numbers of prosecutions for and passive corruption (Source: UN crime and crime trends surveys, European sourcebook of criminal statistics, Commission crime and criminal statistics) Perception of levels of and passive corruption (Source: survey) Numbers of crimes subject to EU interventions and instruments (Source: UN crime and crime trends surveys, European sourcebook of criminal statistics, Commission crime and criminal statistics) instrument Objectives Implementation at national level Indicators/evaluation questions Specific issues /comments Immediate results Framework Decision (FD) of 13 2002 on combating terrorism (2002/475/JHA) To approximate the definition of terrorist offences, and penalties and sanctions in all MS To establish jurisdictional rules to ensure that offences are prosecuted To apply specific measures for victims of terrorist offences Implementation of FD Application of FD provisions. The number of definitions of offences, penalties and sanctions approximated Number of measures applied for victims of terrorist offences MS) Number of terrorists prosecuted as a result of FD Reduced instances of terrorist activities Improved help to victims of terrorism Difficult to assess the causal links between outputs, outcomes and impacts Pilot project on victims of terrorism To help the victims of terrorist acts and/or their relatives to recover by means of social or psychological support provided by organisations and/or their networks. To raise the awareness of public against the terrorist threat, so that the traditional fight against terrorism through and judiciary measures can be complemented by public opinion condemning terrorism in all its forms. Implementation of projects Number of beneficiaries assisted through psychological support Number of special training programmes organised Number of social integration programmes organised for victims Number of special programmes created Number of events and information campaigns organised Improved cooperation and exchange Increased research on the situation of victims of terrorist acts Creation of reception centres for victims Improved social and psychological support to victims of terrorist attacks Increase awareness of public Pilot project on prevention, preparedness and response to terrorist attacks To combat terrorism To improve the security of citizens Implementation of projects Number of studies carried out Number of expert networks set up Development of capabilities for the management of crises Exchange of experience and best practice Improved expertise on terrorism Increased exchange of expertise Increased cooperation with international partners Smuggling and trafficking of human beings Council Framework Decision (FD) 2002/629/JHA of 19 2002 on combating trafficking in human beings Reduce human trafficking Implementation of FD Application of FD provisions. Number of detentions resulting from FD (Source: MS) Successful prosecutions resulting from FD (Source: MS) Reduced trafficking in human beings Reduction in damage to victims of trafficking Identifying cases specifically linked to FD may be problematic Sexual exploitation Council frameword decision (FD) 2004/68/JHA of on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography Reduce sexual exploitation of children. Reduce child pornography. Implementation of FD Application of FD provisions. Number of detentions resulting from FD (Source: MS) Successful prosecutions resulting from FD (Source: MS) Reduced sexual exploitation of children. Indicated for example by reductions in numbers of complaints. Reduced child pornography. Indicated for example by reduction in number of illicit websites and other outlets.