COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - BIANNUAL UPDATE OF THE SCOREBOARD TO REVIEW PROGRESS ON THE CREATION OF AN AREA OF "FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE" IN THE EUROPEAN UNION - (FIRST HALF OF 2001)

CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. A common EU asylum and migration policy

2.1. Partnership with countries of origin

2.2. A common European asylum system

2.3. Fair treatment of third-country nationals

2.4. Management of migration flows

3. A Genuine European Area of Justice

3.1. Better access to justice in Europe

3.2. Mutual recognition of judicial decisions

3.3. Greater convergence in civil law

4. Union-wide Fight against Crime

4.1. Preventing crime at the level of the Union

4.2. Stepping up cooperation in the fight against crime

4.3. Fight against certain forms of crime

4.4. Special action against money laundering

5. Issues related to internal and external borders and visa policy, Implementation of Art. 62 EC and converting the Schengen Acquis

6. Citizenship of the Union

7. Cooperation Against Drugs

8. Stronger External Action

9. Other current initiatives 44

1. Introduction

The European Council meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999 invited the Commission to make a proposal for an "appropriate Scoreboard mechanism" whose purpose would be to "keep under constant review progress made towards implementing the necessary measures and meeting the deadlines" set by the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Vienna Action Plan and the Tampere conclusions for the creation of an "area of freedom, security and justice". In response to this invitation, the Commission presented in March 2000 a communication to the Council and the European Parliament (COM(2000)167 of 24 March 2000) entitled "Scoreboard to review progress on the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice in the European Union". A consolidated version was made available on 29 May 2000, incorporating a number of clarifications resulting from comments made by certain Member States either during the Council session of 27 March 2000 or subsequently.

The first biannual update of the Scoreboard in accordance with the Commission's undertaking to review it once per Presidency was presented in November 2000 under the French Presidency (COM(2000)782 of 30/11/2000). Like the November 2000 edition, this six-monthly review does not make any changes to the format, aims or scope.

However, a new chapter has been added in this May 2001 edition, covering a number of Member State initiatives which have a link with the Tampere conclusions and the Vienna Action Plan.

The main changes are to be found in the "state of play" column, which represents the "moving target" that the conclusions of Tampere set for all institutions and the Member States, enabling progress to be monitored in relation to the objective of creating and developing the European Union as an area of freedom, security and justice.

The current version of the Scoreboard, although unchanged in terms of its structure, opens up the discussions which the institutions must pursue between now and the Laeken European Council in December 2001, when, in accordance with the Tampere conclusions as reaffirmed by the Stockholm European Council in March 2001, the progress made in creating an area of freedom, security and justice in the European Union will have to be evaluated.

Since the last version in November 2000, the work of the institutions has continued. The Commission has presented legislative proposals and/or communications on the uniform visa format, minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers, the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, mutual recognition of decisions on parental responsibility, the recasting of Community instruments on the right of abode and the right to stay, strengthening security in the information society, and common definitions, charges and penalties for drug-trafficking. For their part, certain Member States have also presented several initiatives currently on the table at the Council.

The European Parliament has expressed its opinions on the different proposals for legislation which have been submitted to it, and has not hesitated to express a negative opinion when it has felt that their content corresponded only partly, if at all, to the intended line of policy.

As regards the instruments which have been or will be adopted under the Swedish presidency, we can cite, for example, the framework decision on the status of victims, the setting up of the provisional Eurojust unit (which should be replaced in December 2001 by the definitive unit), temporary protection, the civil judicial network and the crime prevention network.

Our balance sheet shows that the timetable has already slipped somewhat and shows a lack of visible, concrete actions in certain areas. Furthermore, it must be noted that although a number of projects were planned for April 2001 in the Vienna Action Plan and at Tampere, this schedule has not been adhered to. This is the case, for example, with certain legal instruments on asylum, and the fight against certain types of crime, such as corruption, drug trafficking and cyber-crime. The ratification of conventions on extradition and the implementation of the Mutual Legal Assistance Convention and other aspects of mutual assistance have also been delayed.

We are all partly responsible; it is true that the Commission has presented a number of proposals later than originally intended. The delays concern the revision of the Rome Convention on contractual obligations, the proposal on the common definition, charges and penalties for drug-trafficking, and the proposal for the revision of the Dublin Convention. However, the Commission will be in a position to present, before the summer, all the proposals on the definition of an asylum and immigration policy in line with the principles agreed at Tampere. As for the Council, it has not yet reached an agreement on the Commission's proposal on family reunification, amongst other things, and numerous conventions have not yet been ratified by all 15 Member States.

And yet, as noted above, there has been no let up in the work. However, some of it has been directed at one-off activities which have only contributed a very limited added value. It is expected that the Laeken European Council will not only evaluate the progress achieved but that it will also consider actions that have not yet been undertaken.

The Scoreboard also shows cases where the actions envisaged are not actually put into effect, as is the case with the fight against tax fraud and the instruments intended to supplement the fight against money-laundering.

We must therefore continue the debate about priorities and about the most efficient way of meeting the objectives within the deadlines, with a view to giving the necessary boost to the pace of the work in the areas where the worst delays have occurred.

2. A common EU asylum and migration policy

The separate but closely related issues of asylum and migration call for the development of a common EU policy to include the following elements:

2.1. Partnership with countries of origin

A comprehensive approach to migration will be developed, addressing political, human rights and development issues in countries and regions of origin and transit, on the basis of a partnership with those countries and regions and with a view to promoting co-development.

>TABLE POSITION>

2.2. A common European asylum system

The aim is to ensure full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention, ensuring that nobody is sent back to persecution, i.e. maintaining the principle of non-refoulement.

In the long term, a common asylum procedure and a uniform status for refugees must be established, to be valid throughout the Union.

Secondary movements by asylum seekers between Member States should be limited.

Agreement will be actively sought on a temporary protection regime for displaced persons, on the basis of solidarity among Member States.

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

2.3. Fair treatment of third-country nationals

The conditions for admission and residence of third-country nationals will be approximated, on the basis of a shared assessment of economic and demographic developments within the Union, as well as of the situation in the countries of origin.

An integration policy should aim at granting third-country nationals who reside legally on the territory of Member States (and in particular long-term residents), rights and obligations comparable to those of European Union citizens, as well as enhancing non-discrimination and the fight against racism and xenophobia.

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

2.4. Management of migration flows

Management of migration flows should be improved at every stage through close cooperation with countries of origin and transit.

The fight against illegal immigration will be enhanced by combating the criminal networks involved while securing the rights of victims.

>TABLE POSITION>

3. A Genuine European Area of Justice

The ambition is to give citizens a common sense of justice throughout the Union. Justice must be seen as facilitating the day-to-day life of people and bringing to justice those who threaten the freedom and security of individuals and society. This includes both better access to justice and full judicial cooperation among Member States.

3.1. Better access to justice in Europe

A genuine area of justice must ensure that individuals and businesses can approach courts and authorities in any Member State as easily as in their own and not be prevented or discouraged from exercising their rights by the complexity of the legal and administrative systems in the Member States.

>TABLE POSITION>

3.2. Mutual recognition of judicial decisions

A genuine area of justice must provide legal certainty to individuals and to economic operators. To that end, judgments and decisions should be respected and enforced throughout the Union.

Enhanced mutual recognition of judicial decisions and judgments and the necessary approximation of legislation would facilitate cooperation between authorities and the judicial protection of individual rights. The principle of mutual recognition should become the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters within the European Union.

As regards civil matters;

>TABLE POSITION>

As regards criminal matters;

>TABLE POSITION>

3.3. Greater convergence in civil law

In order to smooth judicial cooperation and enhance access to law, better compatibility and more convergence between the legal systems must be achieved.

>TABLE POSITION>

4. Union-wide Fight against Crime

A balanced development of Union-wide measures against all forms of crime, including serious organised and transnational crime, should be achieved while protecting the freedom and legal rights of individuals and economic operators.

In this context, particular attention is drawn to the "European Union Strategy for the beginning of the new Millennium" on prevention and control of organised crime. Some complementary actions, going beyond the Tampere conclusions and called for by the recommendations in this strategy, have been included in this chapter.

4.1. Preventing crime at the level of the Union

Any efficient policy in the fight against all types of crime, organised or otherwise, must include also preventive measures of a multidisciplinary nature.

Crime prevention aspects must be incorporated into actions and programmes against crime at Union and Member State level.

Cooperation between national prevention organisations should be encouraged and certain priority areas should be identified.

>TABLE POSITION>

4.2. Stepping up cooperation in the fight against crime

In a genuine area of justice, criminals must not find ways of exploiting differences in the judicial systems of Members States.

Giving citizens a high level of protection implies greater cooperation between the authorities responsible for applying the law. To this end, maximum benefit should be derived from cooperation between authorities in the Member States when investigating cross-border cases.

The Treaty of Amsterdam, by conferring additional powers on Europol, recognised the latter's essential and central role in facilitating European cooperation in preventing and combating organised crime.

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

4.3. Fight against certain forms of crime

With regard to national criminal law, efforts to agree on common definitions, changes and penalties should be focused in the first instance on a limited number of sectors of particular relevance. Agreements on common definitions, charges and penalties regarding serious organised and transnational crime need to be established in order to protect the freedom and legal rights of individual and economic operators.

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

4.4. Special action against money laundering

Money laundering is at the very heart of organised crime. For that reason measures must be taken to root it out wherever it occurs and to ensure that concrete steps are taken to trace, freeze, seize and confiscate the proceeds of crime.

>TABLE POSITION>

5. Issues related to internal and external borders and visa policy, Implementation of Art. 62 EC and converting the Schengen Acquis

>TABLE POSITION>

6. Citizenship of the Union

>TABLE POSITION>

7. Cooperation Against Drugs

As a collective and individual threat, the drugs problem needs to be addressed in a global, multidisciplinary and integrated manner. The EU drugs strategy for the years 2000-2004 will also be evaluated at mid-term and at completion, with the help of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) and Europol.

>TABLE POSITION>

8. Stronger External Action

The European Union underlines that all powers and instruments at the disposal of the Union, in particular in external relations, must be used in an integrated and consistent way to build the area of freedom, security and justice. Justice and Home Affairs concerns must be integrated into the definition and implementation of other Union policies and activities.

>TABLE POSITION>

9. Other current initiatives

>TABLE POSITION>