Mr President, I would like to begin my intervention by welcoming the initiative by the Portuguese Presidency, which has continued – quite rightly, in my opinion – with the French Presidency. Ladies and gentlemen, as you know, we live in a society in which there are ever-greater cross-border movements. They are of truly massive proportions and have never been seen before in any era of history. In this matter, we simply have to remember, for example, that in 1997, within the European Union, more than 200 million people crossed the borders of their State of residence into the territory of other Member States. The European Union and the creation of the single market in turn involve the creation of an internal area without borders in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital must be guaranteed within the territory of the Member States, as laid down in Article 14 of the European Community Treaty. All of these factors, acting separately, but multiplying their effects when acting together, have meant that every day millions of people quite simply cross the borders of their State of residence into another State of the European Union, whether to live, to work or just to travel. This fact, whose economic and political consequences will be immeasurable in the medium and long term, nevertheless has certain negative implications for the citizens who make this move. One of these is the risk of becoming a victim of crime, both inside and outside the territory of their State of residence, ranging from personal robbery to, on occasions, terrorist crimes, which still cause cruel and inhuman damage in certain Member States of the European Union. Nevertheless, incredibly, the European Union has so far been incapable of creating appropriate formulae for fighting, in a united fashion, this scourge which knows no national borders because in judicial terms, the Member States continue to be shut off behind 15 different national borders. In the European Union, there is currently the paradox that the abolition of internal borders for the free movement of goods, people, services and capital has to live side by side with the maintenance of 15 national borders in the fields of police and criminal justice, which the Member States are making difficult to remove. This situation has unjustifiable consequences for those European citizens who move freely within the territory of the European Union. In the unfortunate circumstance that someone is a victim of a crime in a State other than their usual State of residence, that citizen has to suffer the bad experience of an unacceptable lack of protection, which is due to the inability of the States to build a genuine European judicial area. All victims of crime, regardless of their place of residence or nationality, must therefore be guaranteed respect for their rights and the certainty that they will receive the same treatment and speedy and sure compensation that all human beings deserve by virtue of the simple fact that they are human beings. This treatment should be received in any Member State in which a person is a victim of a crime. It is therefore essential that we create a genuine statute for the victims of crime, a common statute for all the Member States. The main objective of this initiative is to guarantee a minimum of compensation for victims in all Member States, guaranteeing them at least a common minimum. By the same token, the fact needs to be pointed out that European criminal legislation in the Member States has always concentrated its attention and efforts on the criminal, both in terms of the prevention of crime and in terms of programmes and measures for rehabilitation directed at criminals. This is the first initiative that gives special attention and importance to the victim. This initiative could be called innovative and, up to a point, revolutionary in terms of the way in which victims are treated. It is, without doubt, a new element in the European judicial system, in which, for the first time, victims have their own recognised judicial status and not, as has been the case until now, one which is derived from the crime. In many cases, the victim is the object of a crime in the territory of a Member State other than their usual State of residence, which means that their problems and suffering are exacerbated and complicated by a whole range of circumstances which are negative, but common and constant, in the treatment of victims: a lack of communication owing to ignorance of the language, a lack of information, loneliness, a lack of protection in certain areas in which each State has preserved its own legal system. Therefore, and with the aim of being able to respond adequately to the needs of this type of victim, international standards have also been created which take account of the defence of victims’ rights and interests. I wish to highlight just two aspects of this initiative at the moment: European Convention No 116 of the Council of Europe of 24 November 1983 on the compensation of victims of violent crimes. I would like to highlight that, despite its importance and the fact that it is a mandatory point of reference in Europe, the Convention has still not been ratified, as of 18 September 2000, by the following Member States of the European Union: Austria, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Another international initiative is the United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power adopted by General Assembly Resolution 40/34 on 29 November 1985. Ladies and gentlemen, because of what I have said previously, and in accordance with the provisions of Article 2(4) of the European Union Treaty, which lays down that one of the objectives of the Union is to maintain and develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is guaranteed, we must ensure that this area of freedom, security and justice guarantees genuine access to justice so that the European public can benefit from suitable legal protection in any part of the Union. For this reason, the Citizens’ Europe will not make sense unless we first adopt, amongst others, the necessary measures to improve and also take account of the rights of victims of crime, aimed in a global sense at safeguarding all their rights and interests, on the one hand, and, from a Community point of view, at harmonising the legislation of the 15 Member States on the other. Everybody, including the nationals of third countries who have been victims of a crime in any State of the European Union, must receive the same minimum level of treatment. The European Union cannot accept the idea that people might receive different treatment depending on the State in which they have been a victim of crime or on their nationality. This discrimination is patently quite unacceptable. Finally, the initiative is an important step forward in the creation of a European legal area, albeit partial and limited, but it responds to the real needs of an enormous number of European citizens who, until now, have been largely unprotected on becoming victims of crime outside their usual country of residence. With regard to the positive aspects of this initiative, I would like to highlight the definition of the concept of the victim and the adoption of measures which are intrinsically connected to the global attention which must be paid to them. For all these reasons, the majority of the amendments which are included in this report have been produced with the aim of respecting and recognising the rights of people who have been victims of crime, and of taking account of their interests and particular circumstances. To sum up, anyone who has been the victim of a crime must be guaranteed the same minimum level of treatment, their dignity should be protected, they should be guaranteed their rights to give and receive information, they should have access to justice and they should be granted compensation for the damage suffered immediately, effectively and in full.

Political group: PSE