WRITTEN QUESTION E-2021/00

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(21 June 2000)

Subject: Progress with regard to the Corpus juris

Concerning a proposal for a Council directive on combating fraud and forgeries in connection with non-cash transactions, the Commission has adopted a new approach to the harmonisation of the Member States' legal systems. The objective is no longer to achieve textual uniformity regarding the definition of criminal offences in each of the Member States but simply to achieve a precise definition of the result to be achieved in all Member States. The projected catalogue of European law has clearly been abandoned.

In view of this:

1. What progress has been made with the Corpus juris project?

2. What have been the costs of this project?

3. Does the Commission consider that there is any point in continuing with the project in view of the new regulatory approach referred to above?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(8 September 2000)

The Commission would first point out that the proposal for a draft framework decision on combating fraud and counterfeiting of non-cash means of payment(1) is not linked with the Corpus juris. This proposal is aimed at ensuring that fraud and counterfeiting involving non-cash means of payment are recognised as criminal offences in all Member States and punished with effective,

proportionate and dissuasive sanctions. According to Article 34(2)(b) (ex Article K.6) of the Treaty on European Union, the Council may adopt framework decisions for the purpose of approximation of the laws and regulations of the Member States which shall be binding upon the Member States as to the result to be achieved but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods and shall not entail direct effect. Within the third pillar, textual uniformity could therefore at utmost be achieved in very exceptional cases.

The work of the Corpus juris(2) relating to the protection under criminal law of the Communities' financial interests was carried out by the University of Utrecht which received a Commission subsidy of493 000 (experts, organisation, translation, publication). Part of the comparative study of the Corpus juris, approx. 2 000 pages long, has already been published(3). The Commission feels that there is a case for continuing the work, in particular, as part of the Intergovernmental Conference. The aim is to enlighten the Commission on the question of the European prosecutor, Here, the Honourable Member is referred to the answer given by the Commission to Written Question E-2596/1999 by Mr Hannan(4), and to the Commission Communication of 28 June 2000(5). The Commission is preparing a further contribution to its opinion relating to the Intergovernmental Conference on the protection of the Communities' financial interests, the anti-fraud campaign in order to adopt an overall strategic approach(6) which will include the theme of protection under criminal law of the Communities' financial interests and the European prosecutor.

(1) COM(1999) 438 final.

(2) The Corpus juris is available on the Internet: http://www.law.uu.nl/wiarda/corpus/index1.htm.

(3) Implementation of the Corpus juris in the Member States, Mr. Delmas-Marty/J.A.E Vervaele, Intersentia, Utrecht, 2000.

(4) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 79.

(5) COM(2000) 358 final.

(6) COM(2000) 34 final.