# CE2004078EN.01086601.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/866 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/866

---

(2004/C 78 E/0919)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3863/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(8 December 2003)

Subject:   European Evidence Warrant — a proposal threatening individual freedom?

Subject:

The Commission's recent proposal for a framework decision introducing a European evidence warrant for gathering evidence in other Member States (1) may constitute a further dangerous and illiberal move towards a European judicial area outside the control of national parliaments.

1

The decision contains the same terms as the arrest warrant and goes even farther, since the conviction of a suspect may be based solely on evidence obtained by the State obliged to comply with the terms of the warrant and the decision provides no minimum guarantees regarding the validity of such evidence in a court of law in the country requesting the warrant.

Since only a few Member States have so far adopted the legislation needed to implement the framework decision on the arrest warrant and in view of the various criticisms and doubts raised, does the Commission not consider the submission of this new proposal for a framework decision to be premature? Does it not consider it should even be withdrawn immediately?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2004)

(16 January 2004)

The Honourable Member's question concerns in particular the validity in the requesting country of evidence obtained from another country using a European Evidence Warrant. The Honourable Member raises the concern that the proposal provides no minimum guarantees regarding the validity of such evidence.

The Commission's proposal does not directly address the issue of the admissibility of evidence obtained using a European Evidence Warrant. The extent to which any objects, documents or data obtained by such warrant are admissible as evidence in criminal proceedings will therefore — like any other evidence — be controlled by each country's courts in accordance with the relevant national law. As a safeguard to help protect fundamental rights, the proposal provides that the judicial authority issuing the warrant must certify that the objects, documents or data sought by the warrant are (a) necessary and proportionate for the proceedings in questions, (b) could be obtained under the law of the issuing country in similar circumstances if they were available on the territory of the issuing country, and (c) are likely to be admissible in the proceedings for which they are sought. In addition, the judicial authority issuing the warrant can request — and in some circumstances require — that the warrant be executed in compliance with certain formalities. This should help ensure that the evidence is obtained in a way that does indeed meet the requirements of the law of the issuing country.

The Commission therefore does not agree that its proposal for a European Evidence Warrant constitutes a dangerous and illiberal move as suggested by the Honourable Member. Nor does the Commission agree with the suggestion that it should withdraw its proposal.

---

(1)  COM(2003) 688 final.

1

---