# C_2004116EN.01002001.xml

| 30.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 116/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 116/20

---

COUNCIL RESOLUTION

COUNCIL RESOLUTION

of 29 April 2004

on a Model Protocol for the establishment in Member States of partnerships between the public and private sectors to reduce the harm from organised crime

(2004/C 116/07)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Whereas:

| (1) | One of the European Union's objectives is to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an area of freedom security and justice. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

One of the European Union's objectives is to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an area of freedom security and justice.

| (2) | That objective shall be achieved by preventing and combating organised crime through closer cooperation between police forces and other competent authorities in the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

That objective shall be achieved by preventing and combating organised crime through closer cooperation between police forces and other competent authorities in the Member States.

| (3) | The European Union Strategy for the Beginning of the New Millennium on the Prevention and Control of Organised Crime and, in particular Chapter 2.3 thereof, calls for strengthening the prevention of organised crime and strengthening partnerships between the criminal justice system and civil society. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The European Union Strategy for the Beginning of the New Millennium on the Prevention and Control of Organised Crime and, in particular Chapter 2.3 thereof, calls for strengthening the prevention of organised crime and strengthening partnerships between the criminal justice system and civil society.

| (4) | The recommendations contained in the 2003 EU Organised Crime Report support partnerships between public and private organisations as an important approach to crime prevention. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The recommendations contained in the 2003 EU Organised Crime Report support partnerships between public and private organisations as an important approach to crime prevention.

| (5) | Recommendation 8 of the Final Report of the Second Round of Mutual Evaluations calls on Member States to consider the development of instruments that would facilitate formal agreements between law enforcement agencies and private companies. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Recommendation 8 of the Final Report of the Second Round of Mutual Evaluations calls on Member States to consider the development of instruments that would facilitate formal agreements between law enforcement agencies and private companies.

| (6) | The outcome of the conference ‘Tackling Organised Crime in Partnership’ (20 to 21 November 2003 Dublin) co-financed under the European Community's AGIS programme and developed through a partnership of the incoming Irish and Dutch Presidencies of the Council with the support of Europol and the Commission also addresses this matter. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

The outcome of the conference ‘Tackling Organised Crime in Partnership’ (20 to 21 November 2003 Dublin) co-financed under the European Community's AGIS programme and developed through a partnership of the incoming Irish and Dutch Presidencies of the Council with the support of Europol and the Commission also addresses this matter.

| (7) | Organised crime, if left unchecked, will increasingly cause serious social and economic harm to Governments and business while also seriously damaging the quality of life of citizens. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Organised crime, if left unchecked, will increasingly cause serious social and economic harm to Governments and business while also seriously damaging the quality of life of citizens.

| (8) | The whole of society has a stake in preventing the advance and infiltration of organised crime and it must be tackled at local, national and EU levels. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The whole of society has a stake in preventing the advance and infiltration of organised crime and it must be tackled at local, national and EU levels.

| (9) | The private and public sectors share a common interest in jointly developing ways to identify and prevent the incidence of harm from the activities of organised crime. Partnership arrangements in the fight against organised crime are already in place or underway in different ways in some Member States and have yielded positive results. Such arrangements include partnerships between the public and private sectors which operate successfully on an informal basis. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

The private and public sectors share a common interest in jointly developing ways to identify and prevent the incidence of harm from the activities of organised crime. Partnership arrangements in the fight against organised crime are already in place or underway in different ways in some Member States and have yielded positive results. Such arrangements include partnerships between the public and private sectors which operate successfully on an informal basis.

| (10) | The partnership arrangements provided for in the context of this resolution shall not affect the legal and regulatory obligations which fall on the private sector with regard to the fight against organised crime and, in particular, the fight against money laundering. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The partnership arrangements provided for in the context of this resolution shall not affect the legal and regulatory obligations which fall on the private sector with regard to the fight against organised crime and, in particular, the fight against money laundering.

| (11) | The successful partnership structures in the customs area have led to increased intelligence and reduced costs for business, |
| --- | --- |

(11)

The successful partnership structures in the customs area have led to increased intelligence and reduced costs for business,

HEREBY ENCOURAGES Member State Governments

to promote the use where appropriate, of the model protocol set out in the Annex to this Resolution, by their competent authorities that wish to establish or develop partnerships between the public and private sectors, based on mutual trust and a common objective of reducing the harm caused by organised crime.

Done at Luxembourg, 29 April 2004.

For the Council

The President

M. McDOWELL

---

ANNEX

MODEL PROTOCOL FOR PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS TO REDUCE THE HARM FROM ORGANISED CRIME

National protocols for partnerships between the public and private sectors could contain, but need not be limited to, provisions in respect of the following matters:

A.   Structure and membership

Regarding the structure and membership of partnerships between the public and private sectors, Member States could consider inclusion of the following:

National Platform to oversee the partnership process

| 1. | National Platform membership could include appropriate members of law enforcement agencies, members of industry representative bodies and/or leading firms/companies/industries, consumer organisations, elected public representatives, officials from relevant government departments and State agencies, representatives of victims and of non-governmental organisations. If agreed, representatives of university or other research bodies with expertise in the area of organised crime and its prevention could also be included. |
| --- | --- |

1.

National Platform membership could include appropriate members of law enforcement agencies, members of industry representative bodies and/or leading firms/companies/industries, consumer organisations, elected public representatives, officials from relevant government departments and State agencies, representatives of victims and of non-governmental organisations. If agreed, representatives of university or other research bodies with expertise in the area of organised crime and its prevention could also be included.

| 2. | The establishment of expert subgroups, which may be industry-specific or specific to particular forms of organised crime (e.g. counterfeiting), and which would report to the National Platform. The possible need to bridge knowledge or expertise gaps in areas such as forensic accounting, finance, information technology, etc., could be an important consideration in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The establishment of expert subgroups, which may be industry-specific or specific to particular forms of organised crime (e.g. counterfeiting), and which would report to the National Platform. The possible need to bridge knowledge or expertise gaps in areas such as forensic accounting, finance, information technology, etc., could be an important consideration in this regard.

| 3. | Expert subgroup membership could include members of law-enforcement agencies and members of specific industry/business representative bodies or major companies operating in the relevant area. Regulatory authorities could also be included where such exist. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Expert subgroup membership could include members of law-enforcement agencies and members of specific industry/business representative bodies or major companies operating in the relevant area. Regulatory authorities could also be included where such exist.

B.   Remit and role

| a. | The remit of the National Platform could be to -






  1. | facilitate co-operation, contacts, and exchange of information and experience between Member State public authorities and the private sector, |
| --- | --- | --- |

a.

The remit of the National Platform could be to -

1.

facilitate co-operation, contacts, and exchange of information and experience between Member State public authorities and the private sector,

| 2. | discuss and agree priorities for the expert sub-groups, |
| --- | --- |

2.

discuss and agree priorities for the expert sub-groups,

| 3. | oversee the work of the expert sub-groups, |
| --- | --- |

3.

oversee the work of the expert sub-groups,

| 4. | consider regular progress reports from the expert sub-groups, |
| --- | --- |

4.

consider regular progress reports from the expert sub-groups,

| 5. | consider initiatives proposed by the expert sub-groups, |
| --- | --- |

5.

consider initiatives proposed by the expert sub-groups,

| 6. | devise, on the basis of analysis and discussion of expert sub-group reports, national strategies for the prevention of harm from organised crime. |
| --- | --- |

6.

devise, on the basis of analysis and discussion of expert sub-group reports, national strategies for the prevention of harm from organised crime.

| b. | The remit of the expert subgroups could be to —






  1. | discuss items of mutual concern relevant to the specific industry or business area, |
| --- | --- | --- |

b.

The remit of the expert subgroups could be to —

1.

discuss items of mutual concern relevant to the specific industry or business area,

| 2. | develop common intelligence models and share intelligence using those models, taking into consideration the legal obligations of partners and relevant domestic and international provisions on data protection and confidentiality, |
| --- | --- |

2.

develop common intelligence models and share intelligence using those models, taking into consideration the legal obligations of partners and relevant domestic and international provisions on data protection and confidentiality,

| 3. | exchange information on specific incidents of crime, and particularly organised crime, suffered by businesses, |
| --- | --- |

3.

exchange information on specific incidents of crime, and particularly organised crime, suffered by businesses,

| 4. | exchange information and data collected in the course of Government studies and sectoral vulnerability studies carried out by industry, |
| --- | --- |

4.

exchange information and data collected in the course of Government studies and sectoral vulnerability studies carried out by industry,

| 5. | agree arrangements for follow-up of exchange of information, including preventative action in the private sector, |
| --- | --- |

5.

agree arrangements for follow-up of exchange of information, including preventative action in the private sector,

| 6. | identify means to disseminate best practice throughout the private sector, |
| --- | --- |

6.

identify means to disseminate best practice throughout the private sector,

| 7. | identify prevention measures which can be implemented by businesses affected by organised crime, |
| --- | --- |

7.

identify prevention measures which can be implemented by businesses affected by organised crime,

| 8. | identify crime proofing measures which would help protect products and services from the activities of organised criminals, |
| --- | --- |

8.

identify crime proofing measures which would help protect products and services from the activities of organised criminals,

| 9. | contribute to the development of economic harm assessments, |
| --- | --- |

9.

contribute to the development of economic harm assessments,

| 10. | contribute to the development of public awareness programmes aimed at alerting members of the public to the dangers of organised crime and means of preventing it, |
| --- | --- |

10.

contribute to the development of public awareness programmes aimed at alerting members of the public to the dangers of organised crime and means of preventing it,

| 11. | identify/explore possibilities for reciprocal training courses, e.g., banking procedures for money laundering investigators, |
| --- | --- |

11.

identify/explore possibilities for reciprocal training courses, e.g., banking procedures for money laundering investigators,

| 12. | Devise implementation strategies for identified crime prevention measures. |
| --- | --- |

12.

Devise implementation strategies for identified crime prevention measures.

C.   Procedures

| 1. | If requested by any party to the National Platform or an expert subgroup, information provided should be treated as confidential. Information might also be exchanged on the basis of anonymity, e.g., a representative body could pass on information about one of its members without specifying the name of the business or person. |
| --- | --- |

1.

If requested by any party to the National Platform or an expert subgroup, information provided should be treated as confidential. Information might also be exchanged on the basis of anonymity, e.g., a representative body could pass on information about one of its members without specifying the name of the business or person.

| 2. | There should be no sanction for private businesses or industry representatives who wish to pass on information on crimes suffered by them and which have not previously been reported to the relevant law enforcement agencies, for example, for reasons connected with client confidentiality or credibility. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There should be no sanction for private businesses or industry representatives who wish to pass on information on crimes suffered by them and which have not previously been reported to the relevant law enforcement agencies, for example, for reasons connected with client confidentiality or credibility.

| 3. | There should be no obligation on any party to the National Platform or an expert subgroup to supply information. Exchange of information should be on a voluntary basis but may be used by law enforcement agencies for investigative purposes; |
| --- | --- |

3.

There should be no obligation on any party to the National Platform or an expert subgroup to supply information. Exchange of information should be on a voluntary basis but may be used by law enforcement agencies for investigative purposes;

D.   Sectors to be Covered by expert groups

Finance and banking

Information technology and internet

Designer goods

Music industry

Pharmaceutical industry

Motor manufacturing industry

Transport sector,

Armaments industry,

General retail,

Services industry (Entertainment industry, hotels, restaurants),

Tobacco industry and,

Any other relevant sector.

---