Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, part of the price of freedom is that the democratic state under the rule of law frequently chases wrongdoers from quite some distance when it wishes to prosecute them. This is especially true of serious, very serious and cross-border crimes. Organised crime is particularly difficult to bring under control because the odds are stacked unevenly. The perpetrators are ruthless and know nothing of borders, restrictions or rules. Their pursuers are, for good reason, bound by the procedures of the rule of law. I may paint a gloomy picture, but we do have reason for hope. The European Union is making progress in the fight against serious crime. It has a good chance of catching up with many wrongdoers and meting out to them the punishments which they deserve. The public can demand this; above all it expects it in an increasingly homogeneous area of law and freedom, which also offers them protection and security for their material property. A step in the right direction, for which the European Parliament has been striving for a long time now, is the creation of a provisional unit for judicial cooperation. In my opinion, the adjective ‘provisional’ should disappear as soon as possible and make way for Eurojust as an effective European prosecution body. The German Justice Minister initiated this; it was at her suggestion that the Tampere Summit decided to establish Eurojust over a year ago. Since then, Portugal, France, Sweden and Belgium have driven the project forward with their initiative to establish a provisional unit for judicial cooperation. The Tampere mandate is to reinforce, through Eurojust, the Member States’ cooperation in the fight against organised crime. Prosecutors, magistrates and police officers seconded from the Member States should work in a cross-border capacity to coordinate the national public prosecution services and assist criminal investigations in cases of organised crime. The unit is expected to cooperate closely with Europol and the European Judicial Network. As rapporteur, I actually only had one additional request. Cooperation should not be limited only to organised crime. In the interests of the public it must cover the entire spectrum of serious and cross-border crime. That is why I have proposed to extend the legal base by adding Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union. The committee responsible has gone along with me on this and I am pleased to say that the signals coming from the Council are also positive. We should be in agreement in one further respect too. The provisional unit, which we are now debating, can only be the first step on a road which leads via Eurojust to a genuine European public prosecution service. This is not only necessary from an organisational point of view so as to ensure that we are able to tackle serious crime together. It is also necessary to uphold the rule of law. Overall the task is so great and so important that it cannot be overseen by the Council alone. In addition to the Council’s decision in Tampere, we need the expertise and experience of the Commission and the political will of the European Parliament. If the Council, the Commission and Parliament act in unison, the end result will be considerable added value in terms of law and security for the people of Europe. I believe that the Tampere decision and the initiative of the four Member States constitute a good starting point. Let us continue to work together on this basis.

Political group: PSE