Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION establishing a framework programme on the basis of Title VI of the Treaty on European Union - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters

(presented by the Commission)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1. INTRODUCTION

On 31 December 2002, the five biennial financing programmes covered by Title VI of the Treaty on European Union will expire. The five programmes are:

* Decision 2001/512/JAI of 28 June 2001 establishing a second phase of the programme of incentives and exchanges, training and cooperation for legal practitioners (Grotius II - Criminal)

* Decision 2001/513/JAI of 28 June 2001 establishing a second phase of the programme of incentives, exchanges, training and cooperation for law enforcement authorities (Oisin II)

* Decision 2001/514/JAI of 28 June 2001 establishing a second phase of the programme of incentives, exchanges, training and cooperation for persons responsible for combating trade in human beings and the sexual exploitation of children (Stop II)

* Decision 2001/515/JAI of 28 June 2001 establishing a second phase of the programme of incentives and exchanges, training and cooperation for the prevention of crime (Hippokrates)

* Joint Action 98/245/JAI of 19 March 1998, adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, establishing a programme of exchanges, training and cooperation for persons responsible for action to combat organised crime (Falcone).

The programmes were set up with financial reference amounts for two years of EUR4 million for Grotius, EUR4 million for Stop, EUR8 million for Oisin and EUR2 million for Hippokrates. For Falcone, the five-year allocation is EUR10 million, with an average of EUR2 million a year.

For each year of implementation, annual work programmes setting objectives and thematic priorities, laying down procedures and inviting organisers to submit projects for possible co-financing have been adopted and subsequently published in the Official Journal. Numerous projects (more than 720 for the five programmes over five years) have been accepted for co-financing. The Committees set up to assist the Commission in the implementation of the programmes, comprising representatives from each Member State, have usually met twice a year during the period of implementation, in particular to discuss and give their opinions on the annual programmes and the Commission's proposals on which projects to adopt for co-financing.

An external assessment [1] has shown the effectiveness of the programmes, measured in terms of the resources deployed, to be satisfactory. They have met their objectives and made a positive contribution at European level in the areas of law enforcement, crime prevention and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.

[1] Franklin Advisory Services SA, 31 March 2000.

However, the external evaluation suggested a number of avenues to be explored for improving the impact of the co-financed projects, for example fewer seminars and conferences in favour of more exchanges and training methodologies, better preparation of projects, and broader dissemination of the results. These conclusions were taken into account in the decisions renewing the programmes and in this proposal.

An assessment of the results of the current programmes underlined the importance of a strategic reorganisation of all the programmes supporting action in the areas of crime prevention, law enforcement and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The structure of these instruments has been shown to be justified by recent developments in the justice and home affairs field and by the European Union's priorities as defined at Tampere.

Following approval by the Feira European Council in June 2000 of the European Union Action Plan on Drugs (2000-2004), a new budget heading (B5 831) was created for preparatory measures for a programme to combat drug trafficking. This budget heading is also included in the framework programme, bearing in mind the importance of the part specifically designed to combat drug trafficking.

The Commission has accordingly decided to propose the creation of single framework programme governed by the provisions of Title VI to replace the existing instruments cited above.

This proposal is in line with the Commission's general policy of concentrating efforts on broader programmes. It should result in better use of available resources. This kind of framework programme is also intended to simplify budget procedures, make activities more visible and increase the synergy between the five, currently separate, programmes under Title VI.

The European Parliament reached the same conclusion when, having approved the renewal of the programmes, it encouraged the Commission to present a proposal for a consolidated programme before the end of 2001 [2].

[2] Kessler report adopted in plenary by the European Parliament on 5.4.2001 (EP 303.051).

The Council also invited the Commission to present, before the end of 2001, a proposal for a framework programme to replace the existing programmes when they expired, including proposals on the exercise of implementing powers [3].

[3] Council Declaration of 28.6.2001 (Interinstitutional file 2000/0339 (CNS); 9311/1/01 REV. 1).

2. THE PROPOSALS FOR COUNCIL DECISIONS: DEVELOPMENTS

The strategic reorientation of all Title VI programmes affects the five existing programmes.

The idea is to regroup and merge into a harmonised legislative and operational context all action under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union so as to ensure that there is greater overall coherence and that the projects supported have an even greater impact.

The main objectives of these programmes are to offer a high degree of protection to citizens, as well as to help prevent and fight crime and to contribute to the creation of a European area of freedom, security and justice in accordance with the Treaty.

The Grotius, Oisin, Stop, Hippokrates and Falcone programmes are designed mainly for specialised professions such as judges, prosecutors, legal practitioners, police and customs departments, public officials, and persons or departments responsible for assistance to victims. However, training bodies, universities, research centres, private-sector professional associations and non-governmental organisations are also eligible.

The framework programme also pursues the goals of the earlier programmes, while ensuring greater rationalisation, interaction and economies of scale and providing a more flexible approach to implementing the European Union's policy priorities.

It is designed to increase cooperation between legal practitioners and between departments involved in law enforcement and crime prevention in the Member States, and between them and other public, civil-society, and business partners, on combating and preventing certain forms of crime. Lastly, it is to promote projects concerned with assistance to the victims of crime.

The proposed instruments are:

- training programmes on legislation, operational procedures and good practice in the Member States, including training of the judiciary;

- exchanges and mobility schemes in institutions of the Member States;

- seminars, colloquia and conferences;

- research projects and studies on law and new methods of cooperation between Member States;

- projects to disseminate information and build on achievements.

The proposed structures reflect the general trend in Community programmes and the five years' experience gained on the ground.

The restructuring, which follows on from the decisions in 2001, has also made it possible to introduce some new terminology and types of project, for example:

- the proposal includes an annual work programme, with the possibility for projects to last up to two years;

- it introduces specific projects and complementary measures on subjects indicated in the annual work programme;

- it defines more clearly the criteria for the evaluation and selection of projects.

The growing interest shown in cooperation in this field and the more ambitious objectives assigned to the framework programme require an appropriate financial allocation. For one thing, account must be taken of Parliament's desire to provide the Commission with greater budget support for projects promoting the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice. For another, it has been noted that, under the previous programmes, on average only 25% of the projects submitted were able to benefit from Community funding and that worthwhile projects consequently had to be turned down owing to a lack of available finance. The allocation must also be such as to take account of developments in the field of police and judicial cooperation.

Community assistance is limited to a maximum of 70% (though it can be less), except in the case of specific projects and complementary measures, which can be financed up to 100%, the aim being to obtain more precise cost estimates from organisers and to encourage national part-funding of the programme.

Participation by applicant countries in the projects organised under the programme is also a major objective in preparation for enlargement, which should begin during the programme's life. In the meantime, greater participation as partners in the projects by organisations and public departments from the applicant countries should be encouraged. The Commission also proposes that the specific projects (described below) could be used for fields in which applicant countries have expressed an explicit interest. An organisation from a Member State will, however, remain formally responsible for introducing a proposal and for the proper implementation of the adopted action.

In order to keep the applicant countries fully informed of the priorities of the annual programme, the Commission proposes organising information meetings for the representatives of these countries (Article 7(3) of the Decision), to be held after the official meetings of the programme management committee. Experts from these countries could also be invited (Article 8 of the rules of procedure of the current Committees).

This information will facilitate preparatory work on the agreements that have to be reached with each applicant country on their contribution to the programme budget.

The experience gained in implementing the programmes in the past shows that there are gaps in some of the topics covered by the proposals submitted to the Commission, which do not fully cover the policy priorities of the European Union and the thematic priorities set out in the annual programmes. Focused and targeted projects could be proposed to respond to specific needs in specific areas.

It is therefore proposed that the annual work programme identify specific projects, indicating their type (information campaign, conference, training programme, exchange programme, research, assessment of legislative instruments, etc.), and the required topics and objectives.

These specific projects could qualify for 100% financing. The proposals received would be evaluated on the same criteria as other proposals.

On the basis of the Commission's past experience, as well as the conclusions of the external evaluation, it was also felt that the programme should include complementary measures to achieve its objectives more effectively.

These measures are envisaged as support for projects already co-financed under the programme. In other words, the Commission could indicate in the annual work programme subjects and themes (for instance, development of websites or databases containing information drawn from the programme's activities, or meetings of experts dealing with a specific topic) which could be financed up to 100%. The proposal restricts the proportion of annual appropriations that can be used for specific projects to 10% of the annual budget. 10% is also set aside for complementary measures.

The arrangements for the Commission to exercise implementing powers for the programme are based on Council Decision of 28 June 1999 [4] (known as the "Comitology Decision"). Although this 1999 Decision is compulsory only for committees working within the Community sphere of the Treaties, the procedures it lays down, which are included in this proposal, were already proposed by the Commission and accepted by the Council when it adopted the instruments renewing the programmes in 2001.

[4] OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, pp. 23-26.

It is thus proposed that the measures implementing the programme be adopted in accordance with two different procedures, the management procedure and the advisory procedure.

The adoption of the annual work programme, specific projects and complementary measures will follow the management procedure, since this involves defining the priority topics for potential tendering organisations and managing the implementation of the programme.

The management procedure means that the Commission can defer the measure if there is a qualified majority in the Committee against it; in this case, the project is referred to the Council.

Decisions on co-financing will be taken according to the advisory procedure, whereby the Commission is responsible for selecting projects and requests the committee to give an opinion on each project.

The advisory procedure means that the Commission is obliged to take the utmost account of the opinion of the Committee and to inform the Committee of the manner in which this is done.

3. THE PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DECISION: ARTICLES

Article 1

Article 1 establishes the programme, indicating that it will apply for a period of five years from 1 January 2003 and can be renewed.

Article 2

Article 2 sets the objectives of the programme. It points to the close link with the overall objective set by the Amsterdam Treaty and therefore also with the action plans in place to create an area of freedom, security and justice. The programme's specific objectives are then defined within the context of the overall objective. The involvement of applicant countries is also given particular prominence here.

Article 3

Article 3 states who can receive co-financing from the programme. Organisations falling within the scope of the programme are identified and target groups thereby defined. It also indicates what is understood by "European dimension" and, hence, how many partners from Member States and applicant countries need to be involved.

Article 3 also introduces the specific projects and complementary measures that can be financed up to 100% to fully achieve the programme's objectives, within a budget of 10% of the annual amount allocated to the programme for each of the two categories.

Article 4

Article 4 defines actions covered by the programme and includes those implemented under the current programme.

Article 5

The first paragraph of Article 5 covers the budgetary rules of the programme, while the following paragraphs indicate the basic principles for financing projects.

Article 6

Article 6 deals with the programme's implementation. Paragraph 1 states that implementation is to be carried out in cooperation between the Commission and the Member States. The following two paragraphs indicate one basic rule to observe and three steps to be taken by the Commission in implementing the programme. It is specified that projects can last up to two years. Paragraph 4 identifies which measures the Committee established by Article 7 should examine and deliver an opinion on.

Paragraph 5 sets out the general criteria for the evaluation and selection of actions to be financed under the programme. The Commission has included criteria that have already proved their usefulness, considering that it is important for potential organisers to know on what basis their proposals will be assessed (transparency criterion).

Article 7

The first paragraph of Article 7 provides that the Commission will be assisted in the implementation of the programme by a Committee composed of representatives from the Member States. Paragraph 2 introduces the internal rules of procedure. Paragraph 3 introduces the possibility for the Commission to invite representatives from the applicant countries to information meetings.

Article 8

Article 8 describes the advisory procedure. Article 6(4) states that the procedure shall apply to the adoption of actions received from organisers identified in Article 3.

Article 9

Article 9 describes the management procedure. Article 6(4) states that the procedure will apply to the adoption of an annual work programme and to the adoption of the specific projects and complementary measures referred to in Article 3(4) under the annual work programme.

Article 10

Article 10 requires projects to be consistent with and to complement other Community policies.

Article 11

Article 11 imposes an obligation on the Commission to ensure that the programme is evaluated and monitored. It also requires the Commission to report annually to the European Parliament and the Council on the results of its evaluation and monitoring.

Article 12

Article 12 states that the decision to establish the programme enters into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

2001/0262 (CNS)

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION establishing a framework programme on the basis of Title VI of the Treaty on European Union - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 31 and 34(2)(c) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission [5],

[5] OJ C ...

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament, [6]

[6] OJ C ...

Whereas:

(1) Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union states that the Union's objective is to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an area of freedom, security and justice by developing common action among the Member States in the fields of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and by preventing and combating racism and xenophobia.

(2) The conclusions of the Tampere European Council call for cooperation to be stepped up on preventing and fighting crime, including crime using new information and communication technologies, in order to achieve a genuine European area of justice.

(3) The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union [7] affirms the protection of the civic, political, economic and social rights of European citizens and of any persons residing on the territory of the European Union.

[7] OJ C 364, 18.12.2000, p. 1.

(4) It is appropriate to widen the European dimension of projects to three Member States or to two Member States and an applicant country in order to promote the formation of partnerships and the exchange of information and good national practice.

(5) The Grotius II - Criminal, [8] Stop II, [9] Oisin II, [10] Hippokrates [11] and Falcone [12] programmes, established by the Council, have helped to strengthen cooperation between the police and judiciary in the Member States and to improve mutual understanding of their police, judicial, legal and administrative systems.

[8] OJ L 287, 8.11.1996, p. 3 (Grotius), and OJ L 186, 7.7.2001, p.1 (Grotius II - Criminal).

[9] OJ L 322, 12.12.1996, p. 7 (Stop), and OJ L 186, 7.7.2001, p. 7 (Stop II).

[10] OJ L 7, 10.1.1997, p. 7 (Oisin), and OJ L 186, 7.7.2001, p. 4 (Oisin II).

[11] OJ L 186, 7.7.2001, p. 11.

[12] OJ L 287, 8.11.1996, p. 3.

(6) Following approval by the Feira European Council in June 2000 of the European Union Action Plan on Drugs (2000-2004), actions to combat drug trafficking are also included in the framework programme.

(7) The establishment of a single framework programme, expressly called for by the European Parliament [13] and the Council when the previous programmes were adopted, will further boost cooperation by way of a coordinated and multidisciplinary approach involving the various persons responsible for preventing and combating crime at European Union level.

[13] Legislative Resolution adopted by Parliament on 5.4.2001. Not yet published in the Official Journal.

(8) It is desirable to ensure the continuity of the activities supported by the programme, by providing for their coordination within a single frame of reference that rationalises procedures and improves management and economies of scale.

(9) The framework programme needs to be made accessible to the applicant countries, as partners and participants in the projects funded under the programme.

(10) The measures required to implement this Decision must be adopted according to the procedures laid down in it, with the assistance of a Committee.

(11) To increase the added value of the projects implemented under this Decision, it is necessary to ensure consistency and complementarity between these projects and other forms of Community intervention.

(12) Regular monitoring and evaluation of this programme need to be ensured so that the effectiveness of the projects carried out can be assessed in the light of the objectives and so that the priorities can be re-adjusted if necessary.

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1 - Establishment of the programme

1. This Decision establishes a framework programme for police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the context of the area of freedom, security and justice.

2. The programme is hereby established for the period from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2007 and may be extended beyond the latter date.

Article 2 - Programme objectives

1. The programme shall contribute to the general objective of providing European Union citizens with a high level of protection in an area of freedom, security and justice. In this context, it aims, in particular, to:

(a) develop, implement and evaluate European policies in this field;

(b) promote and strengthen networking, mutual cooperation on general subjects of common interest to the Member States, the exchange and dissemination of information, experience and best practice, local and regional cooperation, and the improvement and adaptation of training and technical and scientific research;

(c) encourage Member States to step up cooperation with the applicant countries, other non-Union countries and appropriate regional and international organisations.

2. The programme shall support projects in the following areas:

(a) judicial cooperation in general and criminal matters, including the ongoing training of the judiciary;

(b) cooperation between law enforcement authorities;

(c) cooperation between law enforcement authorities and other public or private organisations in the Member States involved in preventing and fighting crime, organised or otherwise;

(d) assistance to victims of crime.

Article 3 - Access to the programme

1. The programme shall co-finance projects of a maximum duration of two years presented by public or private institutions and bodies, including professional organisations, non-governmental organisations, associations, organisations representing business, research and basic and further training institutes, and law enforcement services in the Member States and the applicant countries; the projects shall be directed at the target groups set out in paragraph 2.

2. The programme shall be directed at the following target groups:

(a) legal practitioners: judges, public prosecutors, lawyers, law officials, criminal investigation officers, bailiffs, experts, court interpreters, and other professionals associated with the judiciary;

(b) law-enforcement officials and officers: public bodies in Member States which are responsible under national law for preventing, detecting and combating criminal offences;

(c) officials in other government departments and representatives of associations, professional organisations, research and business involved in fighting and preventing crime, organised or otherwise;

(d) representatives of victim assistance services, including public departments responsible for immigration and social services.

3. To be eligible for co-financing, the projects must involve at least three Member States, or two Member States and one applicant country, and have the objectives mentioned in Article 2.

4. The programme may also finance:

(a) specific projects presented in accordance with paragraph 1 that are of particular interest in terms of the programme's priorities or cooperation with the applicant countries;

(b) complementary measures such as seminars, meetings of experts or other activities to disseminate the results obtained under the programme.

Article 4 - Activities of the programme

The programme shall comprise the following types of project:

(a) training;

(b) setting up and launching exchange and placement schemes;

(c) studies and research;

(d) dissemination of the results obtained under the programme;

(e) assistance for the establishment of networks;

(f) conferences and seminars.

Article 5 - Financing the programme

1. The annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective.

2. The co-financing of a project by the programme shall be exclusive of any other financing by another programme financed by the general budget of the European Communities.

3. Financing decisions shall be followed by grant contracts between the Commission and the organisers. The financing decisions and contracts arising therefrom shall be subject to financial control by the Commission and to audits by the Court of Auditors.

4. The proportion of financial support from the general budget of the European Communities shall not exceed 70% of the total cost of the project.

5. However, the specific projects and complementary measures mentioned in Article 3(4) can be financed to 100%, up to a ceiling of 10% of the total financial package allocated annually to the programme for each of the two categories.

Article 6 - Implementation of the programme

1. The Commission shall be responsible for the management and implementation of the programme, in cooperation with the Member States.

2. The programme shall be managed by the Commission in accordance with the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.

3. To implement the programme, the Commission shall:

(a) prepare an annual work programme comprising specific objectives, thematic priorities and, if necessary, a list of specific projects and complementary measures;

(b) evaluate and select the projects submitted and ensure management of them.

4. Examination of the projects presented shall be carried out in accordance with the advisory procedure laid down in Article 8. Examination of the annual work programme, the specific projects and the complementary measures shall be carried out in accordance with the management procedure laid down in Article 9.

5. The Commission shall, on condition that they are compatible with the relevant policies, evaluate and select projects submitted by the organisers on the basis of the following criteria:

(a) conformity with the programme's objectives;

(b) European dimension of the project and scope for participation by the applicant countries;

(c) compatibility with the work undertaken or planned within the framework of the European Union's policy priorities on judicial cooperation in general and criminal matters;

(d) extent to which the project complements other past, present or future cooperation projects;

(e) ability of the organiser to implement the project;

(f) inherent quality of the project in terms of its conception, organisation, presentation and expected results;

(g) amount of the grant requested under the programme and proportionality with the expected results;

(h) the impact of the expected results on the programme's objectives.

Article 7 - Committee

1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee composed of the representatives of the Member States and chaired by the representative of the Commission, hereafter referred to as the "Committee".

2. The Committee shall adopt its rules of procedure on a proposal by the chair, on the basis of standard rules of procedure which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

3. The Commission may invite representatives from the applicant countries to information meetings after the Committee's meetings.

Article 8 - Advisory procedure

1. Where reference is made to this Article, the representative of the Commission shall submit to the committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The Committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft, within a time-limit which the chair may lay down according to the urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a vote.

2. The opinion shall be recorded in the minutes; each Member State may request that its position be recorded in the minutes.

3. The Commission shall take the utmost account of the opinion delivered by the Committee. It shall inform the Committee of the manner in which the opinion has been taken into account.

Article 9 - Management procedure

1. Where reference is made to this Article, the representative of the Commission shall submit to the committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The Committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft, within a time-limit which the chair may lay down according to the urgency of the matter. The opinion shall be delivered by the majority laid down in Article 205(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in the case of decisions which the Council is required to adopt on a proposal from the Commission. The votes of the representatives of the Member States within the Committee shall be weighted in the manner set out in that Article. The chair shall not vote.

2. The Commission shall adopt measures which shall apply immediately. However, if the measures are not in accordance with the opinion of the Committee, they shall be communicated by the Commission to the Council forthwith. In that event, the Commission may defer application of the measures which it has decided on for a period of three months from the date of such communication.

3. The Council, acting by qualified majority, may take a different decision within the period provided for by paragraph 3.

Article 10 - Consistency and complementarity

The Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, shall ensure that projects complement and are consistent with other Community policies.

Article 11 Monitoring and evaluation

1. The Commission shall regularly monitor the programme and shall present to Parliament and the Council:

(a) an interim evaluation of the implementation of this programme by 30 June 2005;

(b) a communication on the continuation of the programme, if necessary accompanied by an appropriate proposal, by 30 September 2006;

(c) a final evaluation of the entire programme by 30 June 2008.

2. The Commission shall report each year to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the programme. The first report shall be submitted by 30 June 2005.

Article 12 - Entry into force

This Decision shall take effect on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels,

For the Council

The President

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

Policy area(s): Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)

Activity(ies): Police and customs cooperation, organised crime, judicial cooperation in criminal matters

Title of action: Proposal for a Council Decision establishing a framework programme on the basis of Title VI of the Treaty on European Union - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters

1. BUDGET LINE(S) + HEADING(S)

B5-820

2. OVERALL FIGURES

2.1 Total allocation for action (Part B): EUR million for commitment: 65 (Sixty-five)

2.2 Period of application:

2003-2007

2.3 Overall multiannual estimate on expenditure:

(a) Schedule of commitment appropriations/payment appropriations (financial intervention) (see point 6.1.1)

EUR million (to 3rd decimal place)

>TABLE POSITION>

(b) Support expenditure (see point 6.1.2)

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

(c) Overall financial impact of human resources and other administrative expenditure(see points 7.2 and 7.3)

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

2.4 Compatibility with the financial programming and the financial perspective:

|X| Proposal compatible with existing financial programming.

| | This proposal will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the financial perspective.

| | This may entail application of the provisions of the Interinstitutional Agreement.

2.5 Financial impact on revenue:

|X| No financial implications (involves technical aspects regarding implementation of a measure)

OR

| | Financial impact - the effect on revenue is as follows:

Note: All details and observations pertaining to the method of calculating the effect on revenue should be included in a separate annex.

EUR million (to 1 decimal place)

>TABLE POSITION>

3. BUDGET CHARACTERISTICS

>TABLE POSITION>

4. LEGAL BASIS

Articles 31 and 34 TEU

5. DESCRIPTION AND GROUNDS

5.1 Need for Community intervention

5.1.1 Objectives pursued

The existing programmes Grotius, Oisin, Stop, Falcone and Hippokrates have begun to prepare the target groups for the creation of the area of freedom, security and justice. The lessons learnt from experience on the ground have shown that there is a growing need for training, information and communication between officers of the judiciary and the police in the Member States, in particular in order to combat organised crime, which is increasingly international in scope. Furthermore, the exchange of experience has borne fruit in the areas covered by Title VI TEU, including as regards general and petty crime. This is an area where a national approach remains predominant. There are few members of the judiciary, legal experts and civil servants in any one Member State who are familiar with the legislation on criminal and policing matters in at least one other Member State besides their own, and with the languages and specialised legal and administrative terminology. The proportion can be put at around 3% of the staff of judicial authorities and the police in the Member States, or some 90 000 individuals within the EU that possess (in part) this kind of comparative knowledge.

Bearing in mind that four of the previous programmes in their first five-year phase contributed funding to some 720 projects, each affecting on average a rather limited population of participants and specialists, it can be estimated that the results of the programmes affected a population of between 50 000 and 100 000, excluding the publications intended for a wider public.

The number of projects to be funded under the second phase (2001-2002) of these programmes is likely to be around 300, with between 45 000 and 50 000 new participants.

In the light of the situation described above and the needs of legal practitioners, police officers and the other institutions and organisations mentioned, including the applicant countries which will join the Union in 2004, it can be estimated that some 900 to 1 000 projects will be co-financed under the programme, with some 120 000 to 150 000 new participants.

It should thus be possible to double, from 3% to 6%, the proportion of the target population currently trained in the various forms of judicial and police cooperation and cooperation on preventing and combating crime at European level. This will contribute to attaining the objectives set by the Tampere European Council of creating a European judicial area and preventing and fighting organised and other types of crime.

Furthermore, increasing the number of experts in judicial, police and anti-crime cooperation will make it easier to bring to justice the authors of such crimes as trafficking in human beings, the sexual exploitation of children, cyber-crime, racism and xenophobia, as well as helping to prevent them. Cooperation in this field should lead to a reduction in the number of such crimes in Europe, although no estimate can be given at this stage.

Following approval by the Feira European Council in June 2000 of the European Union Action Plan on Drugs (2000-2004), a new budget heading (B5 831) was created for preparatory measures for a programme to combat drug trafficking. This temporary budget heading, which will no longer be required after 2002, is also included in the framework programme, bearing in mind the importance of the part specifically designed to combat drug trafficking.

Lastly, the programme will help to disseminate and test new legislative measures adopted or proposed by the Commission and the Member States, for example, in relation to the European arrest warrant, the fight against terrorism, or the operation of the European Police College and the European judicial training network, thus facilitating their implementation.

The programme is in accordance with the following policy instruments:

- the Council and Commission action plan, presented to the Vienna European Council on 11 and 12 December 1998, on how best to implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice; paragraph 84 states that "the European Council calls for particular attention to be paid to the creation of a European Judicial Area, in accordance with the Treaty of Amsterdam, endowed with the necessary instruments for effective judicial and police cooperation ...";

- the Tampere European Council conclusions of 15 and 16 October 1999; under part C, the fight against crime at the level of the Union, paragraph 42 states that "the exchange of best practices should be developed [and] the network of competent national authorities for crime prevention and cooperation between national crime prevention organisations should be strengthened ...".

5.1.2 Measures taken in connection with ex ante evaluation

Ex ante evaluation was primarily based on the annual reports evaluating the programmes presented to the European Parliament and the Council, and on the external report produced by Franklin Advisory Services on 31 March 2000, which can be obtained from the Justice and Home Affairs DG.

Account was also taken of the views and deliberations of the programme Committees, composed of national experts and staff from the Member States' Permanent Representations, and of the opinion of the Parliamentary Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights on the renewal of the programmes.

The proposal to merge the five existing programmes is the main result of these evaluations. The idea is to concentrate funding on the European Union's policy priorities, to combine financial resources with a view to improving grant allocation and increasing the impact on systems in the Member States, and to create economies of scale by pooling human resources and rationalising programme management. Merging the programmes thus forms an effective response to the weaknesses detected in the previous system. It will be complemented by internal organisation measures designed to rationalise management still further, in accordance with the reform of the financial circuits of DG Justice and Home Affairs, in force since 15 June 2001.

5.1.3 Measures taken following ex post evaluation

As far as ex post evaluation is concerned, account was taken of the recommendations of the Franklin report to cut down on seminars and conferences, that accounted for two thirds of projects in the past. While they are useful initially, they must start to be supported by structural action with greater added value, such as mobility projects (exchanges, placements and study visits), research and studies, the establishment of networks, targeted training projects and the dissemination of results.

In addition, the procedures for selecting projects have been defined on the basis of transparent criteria, and guides for applicants produced, along with a standard application and assessment form, available on the website. It is also intended to involve national experts in evaluation.

Awarding contracts, monitoring and follow-up will be carried out within operational units, with the assistance and supervision of financial experts, who will take part in project evaluation from the outset, in order to ensure constant monitoring throughout the life of the project.

5.2 Actions envisaged and arrangements for budget intervention

One aspect that was highlighted in relation to the management of the previous programmes was the comparatively small share of operational training projects as opposed to conferences and seminars. The framework programme will be re-directed so as to reduce the share of the latter, the goal being to bring it in the first two years of the framework programme to less than 50% of projects, and at the end of the programme to 40%. At the same time, expert mobility (exchanges, placements, etc.), which was scarcely implemented under the previous programmes, should gradually reach 15% of the projects funded. The framework programme should also facilitate as far as possible the implementation of operational projects (e.g. joint customs operations, police exercises), pilot projects and training schemes, which by the end of the period should account for at least 25% of projects. Other projects with high added value, such as specific training activities, the establishment of networks, and studies and research will together account for 20% of the annual allocation. However, it should be noted that the framework programme, like its predecessors, should finance experimental projects likely to lead to legislative instruments, cooperation activities or harmonised national practices.

Specific objectives:

- To boost knowledge of specialised language and comprehension of judicial and police terminology in the Member States and the applicant countries.

- To promote awareness of common values in Member States' systems to prevent and combat crime.

- To promote familiarity with the legal, judicial and police institutions and systems of the other Member States and the applicant countries.

- To establish working relationships of mutual trust between individuals involved at all levels in the fight against crime.

- To promote discussions on improving judicial and police cooperation and on experiments in working methods.

- To compare trends in the reform of systems to prevent and combat crime and enforce criminal sentences.

- To facilitate the implementation of cooperation instruments adopted by the Council.

- To increase the degree of communication and data exchange between experts in the Member States and applicant countries.

Target population:

The programme is intended for:

- entities involved in preventing and combating crime, organised or otherwise, especially terrorism, trade in human beings and crimes against children, drug trafficking, arms trafficking, corruption and fraud, but also juvenile and urban delinquency;

- legal practitioners: judges, public prosecutors, lawyers, law officials, criminal investigation officers, bailiffs, experts, court interpreters, other professionals associated with the judiciary and researchers;

- law enforcement authorities: public bodies in Member States which are responsible under national law for preventing, detecting and combating criminal offences;

- individuals and departments responsible for victim assistance, including public departments responsible for immigration and social services.

Need for Community funding, particularly in the light of the subsidiarity principle:

The task of creating an area of freedom, security and justice assigned to the European Union by the Treaty on European Union presupposes overcoming problems which are predominantly international in scope (crime based on trafficking persons or goods). Police and judicial responses that are strictly national in scope often prove to be insufficient, with differences between legislative systems or structures for combating crime often providing opportunities for criminals to escape public prosecution. Furthermore, exchanges of information or experience between Member States increase the effectiveness of the departments concerned and help gradually to align methods without running counter to current legislative, judicial or police systems in the Member States. The cooperation activities supported by the programme are thus justified in terms of subsidiarity, being both appropriate and proportional.

Choice of ways and means:

* advantages compared with the alternative measures (comparative advantages): the implementation of financing programmes under which grants may be made to cooperation projects is the only effective means of promoting the cooperation activities referred to in the Treaty on European Union and the Tampere European Council conclusions.

* analysis of similar projects that may have been carried out at Community or national level: at Community level there are no other specific projects; at national level, the number of projects is limited owing to the lack of a general and financing framework, so that it is not possible to set up a network and disseminate good practice throughout the European area.

* expected secondary and multiplier effects: synergy and added value at European level.

Main factors of uncertainty which could affect the specific results of the operation:

Experience with earlier projects proves that there are none. On the contrary, there is an increased awareness at European level and growing demand from institutions, departments, and public and private organisations for this type of action with a view to creating an area of freedom, security and justice in Europe.

5.3 Methods of implementation

The projects will be implemented by the Commission (direct management) using statutory staff.

6. FINANCIAL IMPACT

6.1 Total financial impact on Part B (over the entire programming period)

6.1.1 Financial intervention Commitments in EUR million (to the 3rd decimal place)

>TABLE POSITION>

>TABLE POSITION>

6.2. Calculation of costs by measure envisaged in Part B (over the entire programming period) [14]

[14] For further information, see separate explanatory note.

Commitments in EUR million (to the 3rd decimal place)

>TABLE POSITION>

7. IMPACT ON STAFF AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE

7.1. Impact on human resources

>TABLE POSITION>

7.2 Overall financial impact of human resources

>TABLE POSITION>

The amounts are total expenditure for twelve months.

7.3 Other administrative expenditure deriving from the action

>TABLE POSITION>

The amounts are total expenditure for twelve months.

(1) Specify the type of committee and the group to which it belongs.

I. Annual total (7.2 + 7.3)

II. Duration of action

III. Total cost of action (I x II) // EUR

Years

EUR

The necessary human and administrative resources are to be covered from within the managing DG's allocation.

8. FOLLOW-UP AND EVALUATION

8.1 Follow-up arrangements

- Performance indicators

* output indicators (measure of activities): (1) number of projects carried out, (2) number of persons trained in new methods of judicial and police cooperation and in knowledge of Member States' police and judicial systems, including specific terminology, forms of communication and awareness of differing national practices and attitudes, (3) number of documents published, (4) number of recipients of disseminated results, (5) number of new networks established, (6) number of persons involved in mobility projects, (7) number of completed studies and research projects.

* introducing data collection methods: (1) creation of a data base on projects for follow-up and monitoring (indicating promoters, partners, participants and target groups, results, final reports, utilisation of expenditure, commitments and payments), (2) creation of a data base on the outcome of projects (documents, IT products, publications), (3) contribution to the website for the dissemination of information to the networks and mailing lists of experts in the Member States.

8.2 Arrangements for the planned evaluation; frequency

- Annual internal evaluation based on projects implemented, which are regularly subject to monitoring and adaptation of their objectives and resources in the annual work programme, approved by the programme Committee and published in the Official Journal.

- Annual report on the results of the programme to the Commission, Council and European Parliament.

- Interim independent external evaluation half-way through the life of the programme and report to the European Parliament and Council.

- Final independent external evaluation at the end of the programme and report to the European Parliament and Council.

9. ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES

(Article 3(4) of the Financial Regulation: "In order to prevent risk of fraud or irregularity, the Commission shall record in the financial statement any information regarding existing and planned fraud prevention and protection measures.")

Information will be provided to project promoters in the information leaflet on funding from the European Union and in the Vademecum on grant management.

In addition, the guidelines on project management and the contract form provide information on existing protective measures. For example, the recipient undertakes to give Commission staff appropriate access to the sites where the project is carried out and to all documentation related to the technical and financial management of the project.

Recipients agree to the Commission and the European Court of Auditors being able to monitor the use of the grant throughout the duration of the contract and for a further period of five years after the end of the contract.

Sample on-the-spot checks will be carried out by the Commission.