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 (Second half of 2001)
Date: 2001-10-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European citizenship, Treaty on European Union, access to the courts, fundamental rights, immigration, public safety

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 30.10.2001
COM (2001) 628 final

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

(SECOND HALF OF 2001)

PREFACE

This edition of the Scoreboard itself follows the same format as its three previous editions. It
presents in detail the many objectives and deadlines set by Tampere; the instruments needed
to achieve them; the responsibilities attributed in each case by Tampere to get the process
started, progressed and completed; and where the next move must come from if the
momentum created by Tampere is to be maintained. On this occasion, a summary listing the
main achievements since Tampere has been added in order to help the reader to interpret the
tabular presentation.

This immediately pre-Laeken edition of the “Scoreboard”, however, also provides the
occasion to extend the analysis beyond the purely mechanical measuring of progress in terms
of the tabling and adoption (or non-adoption) of the various instruments needed. It therefore
seeks also to provide the Commission’s own evaluation of progress as a contribution to the
European Council’s debate.

2

CONTENTS

Introduction............................................................................................................................ 4

1.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

2.3.

2.4.

3.

3.1.

3.2.

3.3.

4.

4.1.

4.2.

4.3.

4.4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Executive Summary................................................................................................ 10

A common EU asylum and migration policy........................................................... 14

Partnership with countries of origin ........................................................................ 14

A common European asylum system....................................................................... 16

Fair treatment of third-country nationals ................................................................. 20

Management of migration flows ............................................................................. 23

A Genuine European Area of Justice....................................................................... 27

Better access to justice in Europe............................................................................ 27

Mutual recognition of judicial decisions.................................................................. 30

Greater convergence in civil law ............................................................................. 34

Union-wide Fight against Crime ............................................................................. 36

Preventing crime at the level of the Union .............................................................. 36

Stepping up cooperation in the fight against crime .................................................. 39

Fight against certain forms of crime........................................................................ 44

Special action against money laundering................................................................. 49

Issues related to internal and external borders and visa policy, Implementation
of Art. 62 EC and converting the Schengen Acquis................................................. 52

Citizenship of the Union ......................................................................................... 55

Cooperation Against Drugs..................................................................................... 56

Stronger External Action ........................................................................................ 58

Other current initiatives .......................................................................................... 61

3

THE LAEKEN MID-TERM REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

The Presidency’s conclusions from the Tampere European Council of 15-16 October 1999
put on record, in paragraph 3 of its introductory page, the clearly stated wish of Heads of
State and Government that their far reaching objectives for the creation of an area of
freedom, security and justice should be achieved in accordance with the ambitious
timetable fixed by the Amsterdam Treaty, as further refined at Tampere. They also made
clear their determination to be kept personally informed on the extent and pace at which
their agreed programme was being implemented. To this end, they envisaged a double
mechanism:

•

•

a “Scoreboard”, to be produced at regular intervals by the Commission, monitoring
progress in the adoption and implementation of the impressive range of measures
needed to meet the targets set by the Treaty and the European Council ;

a rendez-vous, fixed for December 2001, when Heads of State and Government would
hold an in-depth debate to assess the progress achieved.

If ever there was any doubt about this commitment at the highest level, it was forcefully
eliminated by the language of the conclusions of the special European Council on 21
September called in response to tragic events of 11 September. Not only did Heads of State
of Government on that occasion restate the importance of the Tampere programme and its
timetable: they also went so far as to give “instructions” that it should be implemented in its
entirety as quickly as possible. The message to the Union’s institutions and Member States
could not be clearer.

The two mechanisms mentioned above come together in a very concrete way in
the preparations for Laeken. The Laeken meeting of the European Council will
constitute the rendez-vous envisaged at Tampere:
the attached edition of the
Commission’s “Scoreboard” provides Heads of State and Government with an
up-to-date account of the state of progress in implementing the programme which
they set for themselves two years ago.

OVERALL ASSESSMENT

The Scoreboard’s message to the European Council is generally positive: provided that
the prospects for delivering the Tampere
efforts are maintained and strengthened,
objectives remain good The initiative taken at Tampere has undoubtedly borne fruit and
concrete examples of the progress already achieved are given later in this introduction. By
devoting a full meeting to the implementation of the key relevant provisions of the
Amsterdam Treaty, Heads of State and Government sent out the clear signal that they were
determined to pursue a global
long-term strategy with well-defined and structured
objectives. Since Tampere, all three institutions have worked together, in a Union spirit,
with a single goal in mind: the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice.

There is indeed a widespread recognition (both public and political) that
the most
challenging issues facing our society, such as migration and crime, can only be usefully
addressed at the level of the Union rather than by Member States acting alone. In addition,
the establishment of networks have led to a new culture of European co-operation at both
the political and operational level.

4

Furthermore, since Tampere, the Union has established itself as a significant player on the
international stage in the field of justice and home affairs as a component of the external
policies of the Union in general. The Union’s response to the events of 11 September 2001
both internally and on the external scene has demonstrated its capacity to take joint action.

Finally, Tampere marked an important moment in the development of the draft Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union by laying down the mechanisms by which it
would be drawn up. By ensuring that these fundamental principles are respected, the
Charter proclaimed in December 2000 on the occasion of the Nice European Council, has
become an essential component of the area of freedom, security and justice.

Two years after Tampere, it can be said that the questions put by the European Council are
clearly on the table in all their detail. As a result of initiatives taken by the Commission
and/or Member States, there is no further doubt possible about what is involved if the
objectives set by Tampere are to be met Laeken will provide the opportunity, programmed
by Heads of State and Governments themselves, to reaffirm that they meant what they said
at Tampere, and ringingly confirmed in Brussels on 21 September 2001, so that the
necessary sense of urgency will be injected into the execution of their instructions.

Such a message can count on the full support of the Commission.No one would understand
if Laeken were to lower the level of ambitions set at Tampere , either in their content or
their timetable, as this would suggest an acceptance that the admittedly real difficulties of
adjusting national approaches to these sensitive issues imply a need to slow down and/or
dilute the common objectives set by the Treaty. On the contrary, anything less than the
speeding up of the Tampere milestones would profoundly disappoint public opinion which
has consistently called for further achievements in this area.

Taking the key areas in turn:

• Mutual recognition

A major advance since Tampere has been the general acceptance of the concept of the
mutual recognition of Court judgements as a practical way of overcoming the deeply
embedded differences in Member States’ judicial traditions and structures. The principle
having been accepted, for both the civil and the penal areas, Member States’ willingness to
pursue to a successful conclusion the detailed implementation is now being tested.

In the civil area, this principle has already crystallised in two landmark Community
instruments: the so-called “Brussels I” and “Brussels II” regulations. These instruments,
together with other pieces of legislation already adopted (e.g. regulations on the service of
documents and taking of evidence), constitute a solid base towards more advanced degrees
of mutual recognition and the long term objective of completely suppressing “exequatur”.

In the penal area, a key indicator of the Member States’ commitment to this aspect of
judicial cooperation will be the extent to which the Council is able to meet the instruction
from the European Council to adopt within two months the proposals for a European Arrest
Warrant.

• Criminal legislation

As regards criminal law, difficulties have been encountered in the implementation of the
Tampere requests relating to common definitions, incriminations and sanctions for several
priority areas. The main problems are linked to the level of sanctions. This has not,

5

however, prevented the Council from reaching an agreement on the penalties for
legal instruments on the liability of smugglers.
counterfeiting the Euro, nor to adopt
Another encouraging recent development has been the agreement by the 28 September
Justice and Home Affairs Council on the framework decision concerning the crime of
trafficking in human beings. The Council’s response to the insistence of the 21 September
European Council on the swift adoption of the Commission’s recent proposal for a common
definition of terrorist acts will be an important indicator in this area. It should anyway be
hoped that, with that kind of message from the highest level, all the priority areas identified
in paragraph 48 of the Tampere conclusions (e.g. in the area of fight against drugs
trafficking, sexual exploitation of children and high tech crimes) should benefit from this
new momentum which Laeken could usefully confirm.

• Legislation in other areas

More disappointing has been the failure to meet the Tampere deadlines in certain areas
involving legislation. The Tampere conclusions unambiguously call for common policies in
a number of clearly identified areas. In making such a call, Heads of State and Government
were certainly aware that common policies cannot be constructed without a minimum of
adjustment of national policies. Yet the thrust of discussion in the Council on a number of
individual legislative proposals reveals a continuing determination by Member States to
ensure that any common policies should involve the least possible adjustment to each one’s
existing national approaches. Such an attitude is understandable up to a point and for a
limited time, but unworkable in practice, especially when tight deadlines have been set. The
longer it takes to agree on a common policy, the greater the danger of one or other Member
State constructing its own policy with mainly national considerations in mind and without
reference to European context in which it will be set. If this happens, the more people will
question the added value of European-wide policies in areas which feature so high on their
list of daily concerns.

•

Immigration and asylum

The areas of immigration and asylum provide a particular example of this phenomenon.
The decision taken at Amsterdam to move these subjects from the third to the first “pillar”
of the Treaty was in part intended to enable them to benefit from the more dynamic
involvement of the European
Community decision-making process,
Parliament and the Court of Justice. Furthermore, the Tampere conclusions listed very
precisely the measures which were considered essential for the purposes of building up the
common policies in these related areas. The necessary proposals, some of
them
representing a reformatting in Amsterdam language of elements already under discussion
for some time under the Maastricht rules, have been tabled by the Commission and set in
the framework of a general approach spelled out in two communications to the Council and
Parliament.

including its full

It would be satisfying to be able to report to the European Council that the “pillar switch”
has led to a greater sense of urgency and flexibility than was the case before the Amsterdam
Treaty came into force, particularly in the light of the clear deadlines set at the highest
level. Unfortunately, that is not yet the case. To be sure, some positive developments can be
reported as for instance the creation of the European Refugee Fund, the adoption of the
directive on Temporary Protection and the setting up of the Eurodac system. Nevertheless,
discussions in the Council on several other draft proposals, reveal the familiar phenomenon
of one or more Member States being more than reluctant to contemplate adjusting their
national policy to enable agreement to be reached on a common policy is still reminiscent
of pre-Amsterdam days. In an area where nearly all decisions are still taken by unanimity,

6

there is an absence of effective pressure to make essential concessions. This is something
on which, if the necessary political will does not filter down to the detailed negotiations, the
Commission invites Heads of State and Government to reflect carefully on whether they are
taking full advantage of the possibilities of the existing Treaties; on how they will use the
improvements offered by Nice; and what future institutional and decision-making changes
may be needed in the future Treaty including possible moves away from the unanimity rule
in blocked areas.

• Existing and new bodies/structures

Satisfaction can be drawn from the momentum generated in implementing the European
Council’s wish to see improvements to or the creation of a number of cooperation
structures they singled for mention at Tampere. Although at this stage of their existence,
these various structures differ considerably in the state of their development, their basis
within the Treaty and the clarity of their respective mandates, all of them either already
have or can look forward to playing the role envisaged for them at Tampere. Attention must
continue to be directed towards building up an effective, Treaty-based capacity for each of
these different bodies. No less important, however, will be the task of ensuring coordination
between them, so that each has a clearly defined role, thus ensuring their complementarity
and avoiding any risk of duplication or contradiction of effort. Their response, even in these
early days of the existence of some of them, to the events of 11 September, will already
provide a first test of this necessary coordination. The bodies concerned are:
(cid:1)

EUROPOL: Both Amsterdam and Tampere foresee an enhanced role and capacity for
Europol. This was forcefully reiterated at the European Council’s special meeting on 21
September, which emphasised, inter alia, the need for Europol to be provided rapidly
and systematically with the information it needs on terrorism and to be reinforced with
specialists on anti-terrorism.

(cid:1)

(cid:1)

(cid:1)

EUROJUST: Eurojust has got off to an impressively quick start with the early
establishment of its provisional formation. It should move into its second, and more
complete, phase in 2002.

The Task Force of Chiefs of Police: This has now met once in each Presidency since
Tampere. Its operational role and its relationship with Europol still needs to be defined,
but the first ground work has been laid.

The European Police College: Initial discussions have confirmed the enthusiasm of the
practitioners themselves, even if there remain some (surmountable) arguments of a
budgetary and institutional nature,
including the question of the creation of its
Secretariat.

To these can be added:
(cid:1)

The 20 September Justice and Home Affairs Council’s call for regular meetings of
heads of Member States’ Security and Intelligence Services;

(cid:1)

A possible new structure related to border management, in particular to provide for
shared training, exchanges and coordination of border controls between the services
concerned in Member States, perhaps with a view to the establishment, in the longer
term, of a common border control institution.

7

• External dimension, including enlargement

The coincidence of the Tampere timetable and that of the enlargement process means that
the two are intrinsically linked. In putting in place the necessary legislative and cooperation
measures foreseen by Tampere, the Union is in effect creating a new and constantly
evolving acquis with potentially significant consequences for the candidate countries. They
will have to work hard to understand and be ready for these changes. As the Union covers
new ground, new challenges will
inevitably arise. New concepts, such as a mutual
recognition, may require special attention in the context of enlargement.

International developments since Tampere have demonstrated the wisdom of the European
Council’s call for strengthening the Union’s external action on Justice and Home Affairs.
This has been particularly highlighted by the events of 11 September which have not only
mobilised the Transatlantic Dialogue but have also clearly demonstrated the need to
develop the Union’s relationship with a range of other third countries.

KEY MESSAGES

The Commission’s assessment for Laeken of progress since Tampere can be summarised as
follows:

•

•

•

•

the process launched by Tampere has been globally positive,
leading to wide
understanding of and support for the programme set out there by the European Council;

the ultimate success of the Tampere project will depend on the level of continuing
public support which it enjoys; this in turn requires that it be pursued with a maximum
degree of visibility and transparency so that citizens can identify with it as a response to
their daily concerns;

in some areas, concrete advances can be pointed to, notably the general willingness in
principle of Member States to adopt a mutual recognition approach in order to
overcome the obvious difficulties of full harmonisation;

the move of certain subjects, especially immigration and asylum, to the Community
pillar of the Treaty has not, however, produced the hoped results for increase in
flexibility and urgency. This reluctance to make progress should be surmountable by the
injection of a major new dose of political will;

(cid:1)

the new bodies envisaged by Tampere for improving cooperation (EUROJUST;
thePolice Chiefs Task Force; the European Police College) are to varying degrees on the
way to being set up. These successes should be followed up by examining the possibility of
setting up a comparable new body to manage training and exchanges for those (including in
the candidate countries) involved in the management of the external frontier. By contrast,
the progress towards enabling EUROPOL to play the enhanced role envisaged for it by
Amsterdam and Tampere has been slow, even if it can be hoped that the 11 September
events may speed up the necessary decisions;

•

sight must not be lost of the read-across between the implementation of Tampere and
the enlargement process. On the one hand, there is every advantage in having the area
of freedom, security and justice as completely in place as possible in time for
enlargement: on the other, the constantly evolving acquis will introduce potentially
challenging new elements to which the candidate countries will have to adjust at the
same time as the enlargement negotiations proceed;

8

•

above all, the Laeken European Council will need both to maintain and strengthen the
momentum of Tampere, and also to make the link with its separate debate on the future
of Europe so that the next Intergovernmental Conference can introduce any necessary
institutional and decision-making changes to effectively build the area of freedom,
security and justice.

9

BIANNUAL UPDATE OF THE SCOREBOARD TO REVIEW PROGRESS ON
THE CREATION OF AN AREA OF “FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE”
IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

(SECOND HALF OF 2001)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.

This section provides a summary listing of the main achievements since Tampere,
as set out in detail in the tables which follow.

A common European policy on asylum and migration

In the asylum field, the Council has now received all the legislative proposals necessary
to implement the first phase, covering the establishment of minimum standards for
asylum procedures and reception conditions for applicants, criteria for determining which
Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application, the definition of what
is meant by "refugee" and the alignment of additional forms of protection.

In November 2000 the Commission presented a communication in which it put forward
objectives, options and a methodology for the transition to the second phase of the
common European policy on asylum, characterised by the introduction of a common
procedure and uniform status.

The Council paved the way for Community management of international protection
when, on the basis of proposals from the Commission, it adopted: the European Refugee
Fund, which was operative in 2000 and 2001, the EURODAC system, which is currently
being developed and, lastly, the Directive on temporary protection, which provides the
Community and its Member States with a common framework in the event of a mass
influx of displaced persons.

As regards immigration, the Commission set out its proposed method of contributing to
the formulation of a common policy in its November 2000 communication. This
approach entails, on the one hand, creating a legislative framework laying down the
conditions of entry and residence for third-country nationals and, on the other, an open
coordination mechanism designed to promote the gradual convergence of the Member
States' policies. The necessary legislative proposals on family reunification, the rights of
third-country nationals who are long-term residents and admission for employment
purposes have been submitted to the Council. The Council has already adopted a package
of anti-discrimination measures proposed by the Commission and ensured that
the
struggle against social exclusion has been placed on the European social agenda.

The struggle against illegal immigration is another important aspect of a common policy
on the management of migratory flows. Various advances have been made in terms of
legislative instruments have been adopted to
operational cooperation, and the first
prevent the facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence and to ensure the mutual
recognition of expulsion decisions.

10

Other initiatives designed to consolidate the foundations of this common policy are in the
pipeline, especially as regards improving knowledge of the migration phenomenon,
through the preparation of a new action plan on statistics and the creation of a (virtual)
migration observatory, and administrative cooperation, which should be stepped up as
part of the new ARGO programme.

Lastly, cooperation with third countries of origin and transit has continued, in particular
through the gradual integration of migration and asylum questions into the political
dialogue and cooperation with non-member countries, for instance with ASEM, the
Mediterranean (Barcelona Process and MEDA Programme), China, the western Balkans
and certain countries for which action plans have been established on the initiative of the
High Level Group on Immigration and Asylum. The creation of a new financial
instrument by the budgetary authority should help, together with the actions of the
Member States, to facilitate this process.

A genuine European area of justice

In civil and commercial matters, a Civil European Judicial network has been set up
whose purpose is to ensure ongoing exchanges of
information between national
authorities. A European extra-judicial network has also been established to provide
support to consumers involved in disputes. As regards the mutual recognition of judicial
decisions in civil matters, a programme has been adopted which is based on the Brussels
I and II Regulations (these Regulations deal with the recognition and enforcement of
judgments in civil and commercial matters and in family law matters respectively); it is
designed, in the long term, to abolish the "exequatur" requirement for enforcing decisions
in civil and commercial matters in another Member State. This programme, which
focuses on judicial decisions, is to be extended to include the recognition of certain
in addition to judicial procedures
administrative procedures and documents which,
themselves, currently pose problems for the citizens concerned.

A European Judicial Network has also been established in the criminal-law field. In line
with the commitments entered into at Tampere, the Council and the Commission have
adopted a programme of measures to put the principle of mutual recognition into practice
in respect of criminal-law decisions. Mutual recognition must be sought in all phases of
the criminal-law procedure whether prior to, during or after the sentence ruling. As part
of its contribution to the priority measures in this field, the Commission has presented a
proposal for a Council framework decision on the European arrest warrant and surrender
procedures between Member States. The Extraordinary European Council of
21 September 2001 endorsed the creation of a European arrest warrant allowing wanted
persons to be handed direct from one judicial authority to another, which will replace the
current extradition system between Member States.

As regards the protection of victims, a framework decision has been adopted by the
Council. The Commission has also launched public consultations via publication of a
Green Paper concerning victim compensation.

Union-wide fight against crime

An important aspect of the Tampere action plan concerns the alignment of criminal law
in a number of priority sectors, for each of which the establishment of common
definitions, charges and penalties is required. The Council has adopted the initiatives

11

presented by France on smuggling of migrants (directive and framework decision). The
Council meeting of 27 and 28 September also reached agreement in principle on the
Commission's proposal for a framework decision on combating trafficking in human
beings. Work is continuing in the Council on the proposal for a framework decision to
combat the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography and cybercrime. The
Commission has also put forward a proposal for a framework decision on the fight
against terrorism and will present a proposal on racism and xenophobia. The decisions
necessary to ensure effective protection of the euro, particularly against counterfeiting,
are currently being finalised.

The Council has decided to set up a crime prevention network. Its action programme
incorporates the priority areas for crime prevention identified at Tampere:
juvenile
delinquency, urban crime and drug-related crime.

As regards cooperation on criminal law enforcement, the decision to set up the definitive
Eurojust unit is expected by the end of 2001. Its establishment will be an important part
of ensuring proper coordination between the national prosecuting authorities and
providing assistance in the investigation of cases of organised crime. Regarding customs
cooperation, the ratification process for the CIS and Naples II conventions is still under
way.

With regard to police cooperation, a joint Belgo-Swedish proposal was put forward on
extending Europol's powers to include all types of crime. An initiative was also presented
in September 2001 by four Member States on the setting-up of joint investigation teams.
This type of cooperation has had a much higher profile since the Extraordinary European
Council of 21 September on terrorism. In addition, the creation in October 2000 of the
Task Force of Police Chiefs will enable operational cooperation between police forces to
be improved, while the establishment of the European Police College (CEPOL) will
promote police training.

Tampere also called for the development of measures to combat money-laundering to be
stepped up significantly in view of their importance in the struggle against organised
crime. This is also true of the struggle against terrorism and its funding, as reiterated in
the conclusions of the Extraordinary European Council of 21 September. Looking at the
fight against financial crime more generally, the October 2001 Council signified its
agreement to a Directive modifying the 1991 Directive on preventing the use of the
financial system for the purposes of money-laundering that should be formally adopted
by the end of the year; furthermore the Member States have signed the draft Protocol to
the Convention of May 2000 on mutual judicial assistance in criminal matters, which
they have undertaken to ratify by the end of 2002. As regards the protection of the
financial interests of the Community, the Member States have still to ratify a variety of
Third Pillar legislative instruments. The Commission therefore presented a proposal for a
Directive in this field in May 2001. In addition, by the end of 2001, the Commission will
present a Green Paper on the protection under criminal law of the financial interests of
the Community and the creation of a European Public Prosecutor. Finally, the framework
decision on the freezing of assets should be adopted by the end of the year.

12

At multilateral level, an important milestone was passed when the Member States and the
Community signed the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organised Crime
and its additional protocols.

Questions concerning policy on the Union's internal and external borders and on
visas, the implementation of Article 62 of the EC Treaty and the conversion of the
Schengen acquis

The Incorporation of the Schengen acquis has had a significant impact on the Union's
work. Proposals have been put forward by the Member States and the Commission on
certain legislative measures necessary either for the transposition of Schengen into
ordinary Community law or for its development. These different proposals are currently
being discussed in the Council. The development of common practice, particularly as
regards visas and controls at external borders, needs to be taken further.

Citizenship of the Union

The Commission has presented a proposal for a directive designed to launch a
comprehensive reform of all existing Community legislation on the right of free
movement and residence. These provisions aim to ensure greater transparency and make
certain aspects of the current arrangements more flexible.

Cooperation in the fight against drugs

In June 2001 the Commission presented a communication on the implementation of the
Action Plan on Drugs (2000-2004). With a view to contributing to the delivery of the
Action Plan's specific objectives, the Commission has also presented a proposal for a
framework decision on minimum rules governing the illegal trade in drugs and penalties.

Stronger external action

The adoption by the Feira European Council in June 2000 of the report prepared by the
Council and Commission on external relations in the JHA field enabled a series of
priorities and policy objectives to be identified. Negotiations on JHA aspects are ongoing
as part of the enlargement process. The Community has also supported the applicant
countries via specific projects under the Phare programme, partnership agreements and
participation in the JHA programmes. The Stabilisation and Association Agreements
between the Union and the countries of the western Balkans all contain a substantial JHA
component (e.g. the CARDS Programme) At international level, the Member States and
the Community have signed the United Nations Convention on organised crime and the
protocols on smuggling of migrants and trafficking in human beings. These instruments
are currently in the process of being ratified. Also under the aegis of the United Nations,
the Member States and the Community are planning to sign the protocol against firearms
and are taking part in preparatory work for the convention against corruption. The
Member States and the Community are also involved in the final phase of work on the
Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime.

13

2.

A COMMON EU ASYLUM AND MIGRATION POLICY

The Tampere priorities

The separate but closely related issues of asylum and migration call for the development of a common EU policy.

2.1.

Partnership with countries of origin

The European Union needs a comprehensive approach to migration, addressing political, human rights and development issues in countries and
regions of origin and transit. A partnership with the relevant countries will also be a decisive factor for the success of this policy with a view to
promoting co-development.

Objective: Assessment of countries and regions of origin and transit in order to formulate specific integrated approaches

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of play

Continuation of the mandate of
the High Level Working Group
on Asylum and Migration

Council and Commission

Ongoing work within the HLG, notably as regards the utility of extending its term of office
and its working methods.

Action plan for Albania and the neighbouring regions adopted by the Council in June
2000.

The report on the implementation of the action plans already adopted was presented to
the Nice European Council in December 2000

Adoption by the Council end May 2001 of the report on the activities undertaken during
the Swedish presidency

14

Assessment of other countries
and regions in view of drawing
up new action plans

Implementation of a new
budgetary instrument for
cooperation with third

countries of origin and transit

1

Council and Commission

April 2001

Council and Commission

As quickly as possible

Following this report adopted by the Council, new action plans should be drawn up on
the basis of the experience acquired in implementing the action plans adopted so far.
Criteria must be defined before choosing the countries or regions for which new action
plans will be made.

In accordance with the decision by the Budgetary Authority, the Commission ensures
that the operations planned in the 2001 budget (EUR 10 million) are implemented via
preparatory actions. To that end, it adopted the implementing framework for these
actions in August 2001.
implementation of this new budgetary instrument at a later stage if possible in the
course of 2002.2

It will put forward a proposal for the legal basis underpinning

1

2

Follow-up to EP resolution of 30 March 2000.
See also table on “Management of migration flows”.

15

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.

Objective: To determine the State responsible for examining an asylum application

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of play

Examination of the
effectiveness of the Dublin
Convention

Evaluation to be
conducted by the
Commission

2000

Questionnaire sent by the Commission to the Member States in June 2000

Final evaluation report presented in April 2001

Adoption of criteria and
mechanisms (regulation)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

Commission's staff working document presented in March 2000

In July 2001 the Commission presented a proposal for a regulation laying down the
criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an
asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national

Finalise work on EURODAC

Council and Commission

Adoption of the Eurodac regulation by the Council in December 2000

Development of the central unit by the Commission, in contact with the experts from the
Member States.

16

Objective: A fair and efficient asylum procedure

Adoption of common minimum
standards on procedures for
granting or withdrawing refugee
status with a view, inter alia, to
reducing the duration of asylum
procedures, and with special
reference to the situation of
children (directive)

Definition of common minimum
conditions for reception of asylum
seekers (with particular attention
to the situation of children)
(directive)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

The Commission presented a proposal in September 2000

- Parliament opinion in September 2001

The Commission plans to present an amended proposal before the end of 2001

Orientation debate in the Council in September 2001

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

Council conclusions adopted in November 2000 on the basis of a French Presidency working
document
The Commission presented a proposal in April 2001

- Work in progress in the Council

Common asylum procedure

Commission (in part)

The Commission presented a communication in November 2000, proposing a two-phase
approach.

The Commission presented a progress report on the implementation of the first phase
instruments and recommendations on the implementation of an open coordination
policy in the asylum field early in November 2001.

Parliament opinion on a common procedure and uniform status throughout the Union
adopted in October 2001

Possible agreement in principle on the recommendations at the Laeken European
Summit

17

Objective: Uniform status throughout the Union for those who are granted asylum

As a follow-up to the Commission
communication, a legislative
instrument may be needed

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

Approximation of rules on the
recognition and content of
refugee status (directive)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

The Commission presented a communication in November 2000 (see previous point)

April 2004

The Commission presented a proposal for a directive in September 2001

Objective: Adoption of measures for refugees and displaced persons providing an appropriate status to any person in need of international
protection

Temporary protection in the event
of mass influx of displaced
persons in need of international
protection (directive)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

As quickly as possible

The Commission proposal for a directive presented in May 2000

Parliament opinion in March 2001

Adopted by the Council in July 2001

Subsidiary forms of protection
(directive)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2004

The Commission presented a proposal for a directive in September 2001 (cf. previous
objective)

Objective: To ensure a balance of effort between Member States in receiving refugees and displaced persons and bearing the consequences of
such intake

Setting up a European Refugee
Fund (decision)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

As quickly as possible

Decision adopted by the Council in September 2000

Exercises 2000 and 2001 under way. For 2002, presentation of outstanding requests for
co-financing by the Member States

The Member States have selected, on the basis of their respective situations and
priorities, proposals and projects for the reception, integration and voluntary
repatriation of persons identified by the European Refugee Fund. Project
implementation has already started in most Member States under the 2000 and 2001
programmes

Making a financial reserve

Council and EP, possibly on

The Commission is exploring possibilities

18

available in the event of mass
influx of refugees

the basis of a Commission
proposal

19

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.

Objective: To fight against all forms of discrimination, especially racism and xenophobia3

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

Implementation of the principle
of equal treatment between
persons irrespective of race or
ethnic origin (directive)

Establishment of a general
framework for equal treatment in
employment and occupation
(directive)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

June-December 2000

Directive adopted by the Council in June 2000. Implementation deadline: 19 July 2003.

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

Directive adopted by the Council in November 2000. Implementation deadline:
2 December 2003.

Programmes drawing upon best
practice and experience
(decision)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

Decision adopted by the Council in November 2000 on the Community action programme
(2001-06) to support Member States’ efforts. Programme launched 1 January 2001.

Strengthening of cooperation
with the European Monitoring
Centre on Racism and
Xenophobia and the Council of
Europe

Council / Commission

Official opening of the Centre on 7 April 2000. Second annual report published in
December 2000.

3

Measures aimed at enhancing non-discrimination and at fighting racism and xenophobia apply generally to all persons residing in the territory of the European Union; they are
particularly relevant with regard to third-country nationals.

20

Enhancing police and judicial
cooperation in preventing and
combating racism and
xenophobia – common charges
for racism and xenophobia

(framework decision)

4

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

The second report on the implementation of the Joint Action of 15 July 1996 is expected
in 2001

The Commission presented a proposal for a framework decision on racism and
xenophobia in November 2001

Objective: Approximation of national legislation on the conditions for admission and residence of third-country nationals

Assessment of present and future migration flows
into the EU, with regard to demographic changes,
the situation of labour market, as well as migration
pressures from countries and regions of origin

Council / Commission /
Member States

The Commission communication of November 2000 covers this aspect.

The Commission presented in July 2001 a communication on implementing an open
coordination policy on immigration.

Conditions of entry and residence for the purpose
of (a) family reunification, (b) study or vocational
training, (c) paid employment and self-employed
economic activity (directives)

- Parliament opinion adopted in October 2001

- Possible agreement in principle at the Laeken European Council on the

implementing mechanism for immigration policy

Council, on the basis of
Commission proposals

• Commission proposal

for a directive on the right

to family reunification submitted to

Parliament and Council on 1 December 1999

- Parliament opinion in September 2000.

The Commission presented an amended proposal on family reunification in
October 2000

- Agreement in principle in the Council expected in December 2001

•

•

The Commission presented a proposal for a directive on admission for employment
in July 2001

The Commission plans to present proposals for directives on admission for study,
vocational training or other purposes in the first half of 2002

Standards and procedures for the issue of
long-term visas and residence permits (directive)

Council, on the basis of
Commission proposals

4

See also table on “Fight against certain forms of crime”.

21

Objective: Approximation of the legal status of third-country nationals

Council, on the basis of
Commission proposals

Council conclusions adopted in November 2000

The Commission presented a proposal for a directive on long-term resident status in
March 2001

Parliament opinion scheduled for November 2001

Council, on the basis of
Commission proposals

The Commission presented a communication on implementing an open coordination
policy on immigration in July 2001 (see above).

Definition of a set of uniform
rights (e.g. the right to reside,
receive education and work as
an employee or a self-employed
person) to be granted to
third-country nationals who have
resided legally in a Member
State for a period of time to be
determined (directive)

Determination of the criteria and
of the conditions under which,
like Community nationals and
their families, third-country
nationals could be allowed to
settle and work in any Member
State of the Union, taking
account of the consequences for
social equilibrium and the labour
market (directive)

22

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.

Objective: To improve the exchange of statistics and information on asylum and immigration (this exchange should include statistics as well as
information on national legislation and policies)

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

Further implementation of the
action plan adopted by the Council
in April 1998

Commission, in cooperation
with Member States

Preparation by the Commission of proposals for a new action plan end 2001/early 2002

Setting up of a (virtual) European
Migration Observatory

Commission

Preparatory actions (on the basis of previous feasibility study) financed by ODYSSEUS
programme; Commission’s staff working document presented to the experts from the
Member States in June 2000

Preparation of an initial phase for the establishment of a "virtual" observatory, based
interalia on a contribution from Greece

23

Objective: To enhance the fight against trafficking in human beings and economic exploitation of migrants

Adoption of measures establishing
minimum rules on what constitutes
a criminal act and what penalties
should apply to organised crime
linked with trafficking of human

beings (framework decision)

5

Detecting and dismantling the
criminal networks involved by
making the fight against illegal
immigration one of the priorities of
operational cooperation

Council on the basis of
Commission proposals

The Commission tabled a proposal for a Council framework decision on combating trafficking
in human beings in December 2000. Agreed in principle by the Council in September 2001

The French Presidency presented two initiatives in July 2000, one for a directive and one for a
framework decision, on the liability of traffickers.

- Parliament opinion (rejection) in February 2001

- Adopted by the Council in September 2001

Member States /Commission/
Europol

The Commission intends to present a communication on combating illegal immigration in
November 2001.

Possible agreement in principle at the Laeken European Summit

The Commission intends to present early in 2002 a proposal for a directive on
short-term residence permits for victims of trafficking in human beings and trafficking
in migrants who cooperate with the authorities

Setting up of cooperation frameworks to combat illegal immigration from China and the
western Balkans, organised in November 2000 and March 2001 respectively

Work in progress in the Council (CIREFI) on improving action against illegal immigration
networks (see above).

The French Presidency tabled a directive in July 2000

- Parliament opinion (rejection) in March 2001

Adopted by the Council (end May 2001)

Adoption by the Council on 27 June 2001 of a directive supplementing the provisions of

Exploring possibilities for
establishing common standards
and pooling resources for
investigations into illegal
immigration networks

6

Further harmonisation of Member
States laws on carrier’s liability
(directive)

Council on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

5

6

See also table on “Fight against certain forms of crime”.
Transferred from table on “Stepping up cooperation in the fight against crime”.

24

Objective: To assist countries of origin and transit

Article 26 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985

Organisation by professional bodies, with the Commission's support, of a round table
on general issues relating to hauliers' liability in November 2001

Council on the basis of
Commission proposals

April 2001

In accordance with the decision by the Budgetary Authority, the Commission ensures
that the operations planned in the 2001 budget (EUR 10 million) are implemented via
preparatory actions. To that end, it adopted the implementing framework for these
actions in August 2001.
implementation of this new budgetary instrument at a later stage.7

It will put forward a proposal for the legal basis underpinning

Development of information
campaigns on the actual
possibilities for legal immigration
and prevention of all forms of
trafficking in human beings

Promotion of voluntary return

Strengthening the ability of the
authorities in those countries to
combat effectively trafficking in
human beings

Helping third countries to cope
with their readmission obligations
towards the Union and the
Member States

7

See also table on "Partnership with countries of origin".

25

Objective: To establish a coherent European Union policy on readmission and return

To conclude readmission
agreements or to include standard
clauses in other agreements
between the European Community
and relevant third countries or
groups of countries

Council, on the basis of
Commission proposals

Negotiations under way for readmission agreements with Russia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka,
Morocco, Hong Kong and Macao

Development of common minimum
standards on repatriation

Council/Commission/Member
States

The French Presidency presented a draft directive in July 2000 on the mutual recognition of
expulsion orders.

Parliament opinion (rejection) in March 2001.

Adoption by the Council end May 2001

The Commission intends to present a communication on a common policy on repatriation in
the second half of 2001.

26

3.

A GENUINE EUROPEAN AREA OF JUSTICE

The Tampere priorities

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.

The Tampere Summit called for practical steps to be taken to improve access to justice in Europe and for mechanisms to be put in place to protect
victims' rights. It also advocated setting up systems for the mutual recognition of judicial decisions.

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.

27

Objective: To ensure legal certainty and equal access to justice

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

Information campaign and
publication of “user guides” on
judicial cooperation within the
Union

Commission

With a view to facilitating the provision of information to users, the Commission will launch
specific initiatives during 2002, , based on the outcome of dialogue with citizens and business;
and in synergy with the future European Judicial Network and with the work of the Council of
Europe

Establishment of a permanent
information system by a network of
national authorities (the European
Judicial Network for Civil Matters)

Council, on the basis of a
proposal by the Commission

2001

The Commission presented a proposal in September 2000

Parliament opinion in April 2001

Adoption by the Council end May 2001 of the decision establishing a European judicial
network in civil and commercial matters

To facilitate implementation of the European judicial area in civil matters (2002-2006),
the Commission presented a proposal for a Council Regulation in May 2001 establishing
a general framework for Community activities to facilitate the implementation of a
European judicial area in civil matters

Parliament opinion adopted in October 2001

To be adopted by the Council before end 2001

Proposal to establish minimum
standards of legal aid

Proposal on common procedural
rules for small civil and
commercial claims, uncontested
claims and maintenance claims

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

April 2004

Following presentation of its Green Paper in February 2000, the Commission organised a
hearing in February 2001 and will present a proposal for a directive on legal aid and financial
aspects of proceedings.

The Commission intends to present a proposal at the end of 2001/beginning of 2002 for the
creation of a European enforcement order for uncontested claims based on the adoption of
minimum rules which will enable any interim enforcement measures to be abolished. The
preliminary draft was discussed with the Member States in October 2001.

Proposal to establish minimum
standards of quality for ADR

Member States to set up the
extra-judicial procedures

April 2004

The Commission will present a Green Paper in 2002 with a view to further approximation of the
rules of procedure on uncontested claims and small claims.

European Extra Judicial net (EEJ net) for consumers launched in October 2001. It is
based on two Recommendations adopted by the Commission (98/257/EC and
2001/310/EC). The Commission has also launched the FIN-NET for the extra-judicial
settlement of disputes in the field of financial services.

28

Creation of multilingual forms
mutually accepted as valid
documents in cross-border legal
proceedings

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

This issue is dealt with in part in the questionnaire on small claims and will be addressed in the
overall context of the various projects on harmonisation of certain rules for civil proceedings.

In May 2000 the Council adopted conclusions on alternative dispute resolution.

The Commission intends to present a Green Paper in November 2001 with a view to
preparing for the establishment of minimum quality standards.

Objective: To protect rights to compensation and provide assistance to victims

Drawing up of minimum standards
for protection of victims

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

2002

The Commission presented a communication in July 1999.

In March 2001, the Council adopted a framework decision on the status of victims in criminal
proceedings (Portuguese initiative) following Parliament's opinion in December 2000

The joint programme of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition of
decisions in criminal matters also incorporates, among those parameters, mechanisms
to protect victims' rights

The Commission presented a Green Paper on victim compensation in September 2001
with a view to preparing appropriate legislative initiatives

Included in the programme for the mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters
(see part two of measure 19)

Further instruments on
approximation of compensation
arrangements for victims

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

2004

Examining the possibility of
recognising decisions taken in
the interests of victims of crime
where such decisions are
incorporated into sentencing
decisions

29

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:

Objective: Enhanced mutual recognition of judicial decisions and judgments, and the necessary approximation of legislation, to facilitate
cooperation between authorities and the judicial protection of individual rights8

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

Programme of measures on
mutual recognition of civil and
commercial decisions (containing
measures required for mutual
recognition and enforcement;
abolishing obstacles for small
claims and family litigation)

Council and Commission to
adopt a programme

Programme to be
adopted by the end of
2000

The mutual recognition programme was adopted by the Council in November 2000. It
covers four areas:

- for the first area, pilot projects are being launched (see 3.1.4 above);

- for the second area, in March 2001 the Commission presented a working paper on mutual
recognition in family matters, followed in September 2001 by a proposal for legislation to
supplement the regulation on matrimonial matters and parental responsibility.
In October
2001 the Commission also presented a proposal on ratification of the 1996 Hague
Convention on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition, enforcement and cooperation in
respect of parental responsibility and measures for the protection of children.

Presentation by the Commission of the new proposal for a regulation on parental
responsibility will enable the negotiations on rights of access to children [French
initiative] to be followed up.

- for the third and fourth areas, the Commission launched preparatory studies in 2001.

8

See also table on "Greater convergence in civil law".

30

Proposal on minimum standards
for specific aspects of civil
procedure (new procedural
legislation on money payments)

Council on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

Launching of work on the
European Enforcement Order

Council on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

The Commission intends to present a Green Paper in 2002 to prepare a legislative initiative
(see 3.1.4 above).

This action has been included in the programme of measures to implement the principle of
mutual recognition.

The Commission intends to present by the end of 2001/beginning of 2002, a proposal for a
regulation a European enforcement order for uncontested claims, based on the adoption of
minimum rules which will enable any interim enforcement measures to be abolished (see first
paragraph of 3.1.4 above).

Presentation by the Commission of the aforementioned proposal for a regulation will
enable negotiations on the current French initiative on rights of access to children (see
3.2.1 above) to be followed up.

31

As regards criminal matters:

Objective: To make sure criminals have no safe havens

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

Ratification of the 1995 and 1996
EU Conventions on extradition

Member States

April 2001

A, FIN, NL, S, EL, D, DK, E, P and B have ratified the 1995 Convention

FIN, NL, P, EL, D, DK, E, A and B have ratified the 1996 Convention

In July 2001 Sweden presented an initiative concerning a decision laying down
arrangements for the 1995 Convention on simplified extradition procedures between the
Member States of the EU and the 1996 Convention relating to extradition between
Member States of the EU, which builds on the Schengen arrangements in accordance
with the agreement associating the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway with
the application, implementation and development of the Schengen arrangements

Study on abolition of formal
extradition procedures concerning
persons fleeing from justice after
having been sentenced

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

End 2001

In September 2001, the Commission presented a proposal for a Council framework
decision on the European arrest warrant and surrender procedures between Member
States

Providing for fast-track extradition
procedures

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

End 2001

Included in the Commission proposal (see above)

See also measure 8 of the joint programme on mutual recognition of decisions in
criminal matters

Examine the issue of extradition in
relation to procedures in absentia

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

Included in Commission proposal (see above)

32

Objective: To ensure that decisions taken in one Member State have effect throughout the Union

Programme of measures on the
application of the principle of
mutual recognition to be followed
by specific instruments

Council / Commission

Programme to be
adopted by the end
2000

Application of mutual recognition
to pre-trial orders

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

In July 2000 Commission presented a communication on mutual recognition of final decisions
in criminal matters

Parliament opinion in May 2001

Joint Council/Commission programme adopted in November 2000

Most of the top-priority measures are indicated in other scoreboard tables. The
programme's aim is to record achievable progress in making the reservations and
declarations concerning the coercive measures contained in Article 5 of the 1959
European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters non-invocable between
Member States and to examine ways of recognising decisions taken in the interests of
victims of crime where they are incorporated into sentencing decisions

France, Belgium and Sweden presented an initiative on the freezing of assets and evidence
in February 2001

9

The Commission intends to present, in December 2001, a proposal for a framework decision
on the mutual recognition of pre-trial orders in investigations into computer crime

Incorporated into the joint programme for the mutual recognition of decisions in
criminal matters (see measures 6 and 7)

Examine the feasibility of improved
cross-border cooperation on the
transfer of proceedings and the
enforcement of sentences

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

Included in the joint programme for the mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters
(see also measures 17, 18, 20 and 21)

France, Sweden and the UK presented an initiative for a framework decision on the
application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties

Germany announced an initiative establishing, in accordance with Article 34 of the Treaty on
European Union, the Agreement on Co-operation in Proceedings for Road Traffic Offences
and the Enforcement of Financial Penalties Imposed in respect thereof

Study the feasibility of extending
and possibly formalising the
exchange of information on
criminal records

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

Included in the joint programme for mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters (see
measures 3 and 4)

9

See also table on “Special action against money laundering”.

33

3.3.

Greater convergence in civil law

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

Objective: Eliminate obstacles created by disparities in law and procedures

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

New procedural legislation in
cross-border cases (e.g.
provisional measures, taking of
evidence, time limits)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative.

April 2004

Germany tabled an initiative on taking of evidence in September 2000. The issue of procedural
law is partly included in the mutual recognition programme.

General study to identify and
eliminate obstacles to the smooth
functioning of civil proceedings

Council to prepare a report

End 2001

-
-

Parliament opinion in March 2001
Adopted by the Council end May 2001

The Commission presented, in July 2001, a communication on European contract law,
with a view to launching a broad debate on the need for, possibilities and methods of
harmonisation in certain areas of substantive private law. The replies, to be collected by
15 October 2001, will be summarised by the Commission and transmitted to the Council.
The Commission will take the appropriate initiatives on the basis of the results of the
consultation

Finalising the Brussels and the
Lugano Conventions10

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

The Council adopted the Regulation replacing the Brussels Convention in December 2000.

At the end of May 2001 the Council adopted a decision, further to a Commission
proposal, on the launch of negotiations as part of the Hague Convention with a view to a
world convention on jurisdiction and the recognition of judgments in civil and
commercial matters

The diplomatic conference took place in June 2001: negotiations are still ongoing.

The Commission launched public consultations on the Internet and organised a hearing
in October 2001.

The Commission intends to present a proposal recommending a negotiating brief for an
agreement between the Community and the Lugano countries before the end of 2001

10

See also table on “Mutual recognition of judicial decisions”.

34

Drawing up a legal instrument on
the law applicable to non-
contractual obligations (Rome II).

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

Revising, where necessary, the
1980 Rome Convention (Rome I).

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2001

The Commission is carrying out the necessary preparatory work

April 2001

The Commission plans to present a Green Paper in 2002, followed, if need be, by a draft
regulation

Preliminary study on the possibility
of drawing up a legal instrument
on the law applicable to divorce

Elaboration of a preliminary study
on jurisdiction and the law
applicable to matrimonial property
and successions

Council/ Commission

April 2004

In May 2000 the Council produced, on the basis of a questionnaire, a comparative study on
national legislation and the position of the Member States.

The Commission launched a complementary study in 2001

Council/ Commission

April 2004

The issue of court jurisdiction and recognition of rulings is included in the mutual recognition
programme (see 3.2.1 above).

35

4.

UNION-WIDE FIGHT AGAINST CRIME

Tampere priorities and strategy for a new millennium

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 introduced 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.

36

Objective: To prevent crime through reduction of opportunities

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for
adoption

State of play

Council/ Commission/ Member
States

In November 2000 the Commission presented a communication on crime prevention in the
European Union which established a Forum and proposed a programme (Hippocrates) in the
crime prevention field

Identification and development of
common priorities – political
guidelines – to be taken into
account when preparing new
legislation; assessment of new
legislation's impact on crime
prevention.

Prevention of infiltration by
organised crime of lawful
economic activities

Parliament opinion on the Hippocrates programme in April 2001

Adoption by the Council in June 2001 of a decision on the creation of a two-year
programme in the crime prevention field.

Following the Council Resolution of December 1998, the Commission and Europol presented
jointly, in March 2001, a report on a European strategy on the prevention of organised crime.
The next report will also take prevention aspects into account.

The first meeting of the Forum on the prevention of organised crime was held on 17 and
18 May 2001 (first workshops: trafficking in human beings, credit cards, crime affecting
the world of business, trafficking in cultural goods)

The Commission is examining the findings of a study on crime proofing.

Crime proofing

Integration of crime prevention
aspects in actions and
programmes against crime at the
Union and Member State level –
policy guidelines to be adopted by
Council

Council/ Commission/ Member
States

37

Objective: To facilitate cooperation between Member States

Exchange of best practices and
cooperation between national
crime prevention authorities in
priority areas, possibly by setting
up a Community-funded
programme addressing such
matters as juvenile, urban and
drug-related crime

Council / Commission/
Member States

2001

1) France and Sweden presented an initiative in November 2000 for a Council decision
establishing a crime prevention network

- Parliament opinion in March 2001

- Adoption by the Council end May 2001

The prevention network started operating and adopted its work programme

The first formal meeting of the network was held on 9 and 10 October 2001

2) Commission communication includes a proposal for a financial
programme - see above)

instrument (Hippocrates

First year of Hippocrates programme operation, including the priorities identified at
Tampere (see above)

38

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.

Objective: To coordinate and, where appropriate, centralise proceedings

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of Play

Without delay

The Council adopted the Mutual Legal Assistance Convention in May 2000, Article 13 of which
provides for joint teams to be set up.

Set up joint investigative teams, as
a first step, to combat trafficking in
drugs and human beings as well
as terrorism – when investigating
cross-border crime

Setting up a unit composed of
national prosecutors, magistrates
or police officers of equivalent
competence – EUROJUST

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

End 2001

Political agreement in the Council on the first articles of the Convention under which
Eurojust may ask for joint investigation teams to be set up

The Portuguese Presidency presented an initiative in March 2000 on anticipating application of
Article 13 of the Convention - discussions on which have been suspended

In September 2001 Belgium, France, Spain and the United Kingdom presented an
initiative on a draft framework decision on joint investigation teams

Adoption by Council in December 2000 of a decision to create a provisional unit in
January 2001 (French initiative). Provisional unit put in place March 2001.

Preliminary discussions in progress on the definitive unit on the basis of Member State
initiatives (France, Portugal, Sweden, Belgium and Germany). The Commission presented a
Communication in November 2000

Parliament opinion May 2001

-
- Work progressed in the Council in September 2001; final adoption expected by end 2001.

Implement and, where
appropriate, further develop the
European judicial network

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2001

Pilot project on a telecommunications network to be launched in August 2001

39

Prevent conflicts of jurisdiction by
examining the possibility of
registering proceedings pending in
different Member States

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

Included in the joint mutual recognition programme for decisions in criminal matters (see
measure no 12)

The Commission intends to present, before the end of 2001, a communication on determining
criteria for jurisdiction in criminal matters

Objective: To provide mutual assistance to the fullest extent possible

Adoption, ratification and
implementation of the Convention
on Mutual Assistance in Criminal
Matters

Council / Member States

April 2001

The Council adopted the Convention in May 2000

Deadline for Member States to initiate applicable procedures: before January 200111

Agreement in principle reached in the Council on the protocol end May 2001

Arrangements governing interception and joint investigation teams governed by the
Convention of 29 May 2000

In October 2000 the Council adopted a decision establishing a joint secretariat for data
protection bodies (Europol, CIS, SIS).

Decision on the joint secretariat (entered into force on 1 September 2001)

Proposal for a resolution on the initiative of the French Presidency (based on a previous
Portuguese initiative)

In June 2001 Sweden presented an initiative amending the Council Act of 12 March 1999
adopting the rules governing the transmission of personal data by Europol to third
States and third bodies

Consider arrangements under
which authorities may operate in
the territory of another Member
State

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2001

Examine the possibilities for
harmonised rules on data
protection

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2001

11

See also table on “Mutual recognition of judicial decisions”.

40

Objective: To protect rights of victims and provide assistance

Drawing up minimum standards

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2001

Parliament opinion in December 2000

Adoption by the Council in March 2001 of a framework decision on victim’s status in criminal
proceedings (Portuguese initiative) - (cf. point 3.1)

The joint programme of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition of
decisions in criminal matters also incorporates, among those parameters, mechanisms
to protect victims' rights

Objective: To develop operational police cooperation and law enforcement training at EU level

Establishment of a European
Police Chiefs' Task Force

Council on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

2001

Creation in October 2000 of the Police Chiefs' Task Force. At least one meeting is
organised for each presidency. The meeting of October 2001 examined ways of making
the Task Force more operational

Establishment of compatible
criminal intelligence systems
among Member States

Appropriate decision by
Council needed

Setting up the European Police
College – starting as a network of
existing national training institutes
– open to applicant countries

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

2001

Adoption by the Council in December 2000 of the decision to set up, in 2001, the European
Police College, CEPOL (Portuguese initiative), which has functioned as a network of national
police colleges since 1 January 2001. France, Germany and Sweden have launched common
training projects starting in 2001 within the framework prefiguring the definitive structure of the
European Police College.

Ongoing examination of the way in which Cepol will function

41

Objective: To enhance customs cooperation in the fight against crime and regarding the use of information technology

Implementation of the CIS
(Customs Information System)
and Naples II Conventions.

Member States

Ongoing

Naples II Convention ratified by Greece, Spain, France, Sweden and the Netherlands; the
last four agreed to apply it between themselves. The French Presidency is preparing a guide
for applying the provisions of the Naples II Convention.

Strengthen law enforcement
cooperation against smuggling

The CIS Convention (third pillar) has been ratified by Denmark, Greece, Italy, Germany,
Portugal, France, Spain, Sweden, Finland and UK. The Protocol on the provisional entry into
force of the Convention has been ratified by all the above except Italy and Portugal. It will be
applied among those Member States which have ratified it from November 2000.

In March 2000, Italy announced an initiative in the field of smuggling

Objective:

To foster international cooperation in the fight against transnational organised crime

Adoption and ratification of the
United Nations' Convention on
transnational organised crime and
the additional Protocols

Council/Member States/
Commission

End of 2000 for signature

Signature and opening for ratification in December 2000 of the United Nations Convention
against transnational organised crime and its Protocols on trafficking in human beings and the
smuggling of migrants, to be ratified as soon as possible.

Negotiations on the Firearms Protocol completed in February 2001 and opening for
signature in June 2001.

The Commission presented a proposal for a Council Decision on the signature of the
United Nations Firearms Protocol

The Commission intends to present a proposal to ratify the Convention and the three
Protocols before the end of 2001.

Union participation in the preparatory work of the UN (see point 8).

UN Convention on corruption

Council/Member
States/Commission

42

Objective:

To reinforce the role of Europol in facilitating European cooperation in preventing and combating crime with the

necessary support and resources

Extend the competence of Europol
to cover money laundering in
general regardless of the offence
from which the proceeds originate

Examine on the feasibility of
setting up a database of pending
cases

Enable Europol to facilitate the
preparation of specific
investigative actions by the
competent authorities of the
Member States, including
operational actions of joint
investigative teams

Adopt measures allowing Europol
to ask the competent authorities of
the Member States to conduct and
co-ordinate their investigations in
specific cases and to develop
specific expertise which may be
out at the disposal of M-S to assist
them in investigating cases of
organised crime

Consideration to be given to the
possible need to revise Europol
Convention in order to:

–

deal with the question of
democratic and judicial
control

–

cover new competences

Council, on the basis of an
initiative by a Member State

Adoption by the Council in November 2000 of the instrument extending the competence of
Europol to cover money laundering (Portuguese initiative).

Europol / Council

Europol is exploring with the Member States the possibilities of setting up a system.

Appropriate decision by
Council needed

April 2004, without delay
for certain areas

Adoption by the Council in November 2000 of a draft recommendation concerning support
by Europol for joint investigative teams

Belgium intends to present an initiative to convert the recommendation into a
mandatory legal instrument.

Council on the basis of an
initiative by a Member State

April 2004

As a first step, the Council adopted a recommendation in September 2000, calling on
Member States to give consideration to requests from Europol to conduct investigations or
to coordinate their investigations in specific areas.

Belgium intends to present an initiative to convert the recommendation into a
mandatory legal instrument.

Council / Commission

The Commission intends to present, before the end of
the 4th quarter 2001, a
communication on democratic and judicial review and, if necessary, a proposal for a
Council Decision on the amendment of the Europol Convention (see above).

The question of judicial review must be considered in the context of setting up Eurojust.

The Swedish and Belgian Presidencies presented a formal initiative in June 2001 on
extending Europol's powers to all forms of crime referred to in the Annex to the
Europol Convention.

Council agreement in principle in September 2001.

43

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.

Objective:

To adopt a common approach throughout the EU on cross-border crimes

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of play

Criminalisation of trafficking in
human beings and sexual
exploitation of children12 with
particular reference to child
pornography on the Internet13

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

In December 2000 the Commission presented two proposals for framework decisions on
the fight against trafficking in human beings, the sexual exploitation of children and child
pornography

–

–

–

Parliament opinion in June 2001

Council agreement in principle on the framework decision on the fight against
trafficking in human beings in September 2001

Ongoing work within the Council on the proposed framework decision to
combat the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.

The Commission intends, in connection with detecting and dismantling the criminal
networks involved (see Point 2.4), to present a proposal for a directive on short-
term residence documents for victims of trafficking in human beings and of
assistance to illegal immigration who cooperate in the fight against traffickers and

12

13

See also table on “Management of migration flows”.
See also table on “Mutual recognition of judicial decisions”.

44

Common definitions, charges and
penalties
trafficking15

in the field of drug

14

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

The Commission study on the legislation and regulations on drug trafficking in the EU
Member States was finalised in March 2001.

smugglers of migrants.

The Commission presented in June 2001 a proposal for a framework decision laying
down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the
field of drug trafficking.

Common definitions, charges and
penalties in the field of corruption

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

The Commission plans to present a communication and a proposal for a framework
decision on corruption in the private sector in the second half of 2001

Common definitions, charges and
penalties in the field of
environmental crime

Council

April 2001

Denmark presented an initiative for a framework decision in January 2000.

The Council agreed in September 2000 that it was appropriate to draw up common
legislation at European level. A significant body of relevant Community legislation is
already in force

In March 2001, the Commission presented a proposal for a directive on the protection of
the environment through criminal law, which might be supplemented by a framework
decision.

Proposal on common charges for
hooliganism

Council, on the basis of an
initiative by a Member State

The Oisin programme financed a project evaluating cooperation between the
relevant departments during Euro 2000.

The Belgian Presidency has presented a proposal for a decision on safety at international
football matches.

14

15

See also table on “Cooperation against drugs”.
See also table on “Mutual recognition of judicial decisions”.

45

Common definitions, charges and
penalties in the field of racism and
xenophobia (framework decision)

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

April 2004

The second report on the implementation of the Joint Action of 15 July 1996, planned for
the end of 2000, is expected in 200116

In November 2001 the Commission will present a proposal for a Council framework
decision on racism and xenophobia.

Common definitions in the field of
preventing and combating
cybercrime, including common
charges and penalties for
high-tech crime

Council, on the basis of a
proposal of the Commission

April 2001

In January 2001, the Commission presented a communication on creating a safer
information society by improving the security of information infrastructures and combating
computer-related crime

Parliament opinion in September 2001

Work underway to set up a European forum on computer-related crime. The first
plenary meeting of the Forum is to be held at the end of November 2001.

The Commission intends to present, in November 2001, a proposal for a framework
decision on serious attacks against information systems.

Objective: To adopt a common approach throughout the EU on cross-border crimes

Criminalisation of fraud involving
non-cash means of payment

Council, on the basis of a
proposal of the Commission

April 2001

Council agreement in principle in May 2000

Parliament opinion in July 2000

Adoption by the Council end May 2001

The Commission presented an action plan comprising preventive measures in
February 2001 and is continuing its work in partnership with the relevant bodies in
the European Crime Prevention Forum

16

See also table on “Fair treatment of third-country nationals”.

46

Common definitions, charges and
penalties as regards counterfeiting
of the euro

Council/Commission/
Member States

April 2001

–

Framework decision on criminal penalties for counterfeiting the euro adopted by the
Council in May 2000.

Criminalisation of fraud in public
tendering procedures

Council, on the basis of an
initiative by a Member State

April 2001

Reinforcing the legal framework
for the protection of the
Community’s financial interests

Council and EP, on the
basis of a Commission
proposal

- Swedish initiative for a framework decision amending the framework decision
of May 2000.

- Parliament opinion in October 2001.

- Adoption by Council before end-2001.

Adoption by the Council in June 2001 of the regulations defining the measures
needed to protect the euro from counterfeiting

Council agreement in principle on a French initiative for a draft decision on the
protection of the euro against counterfeiting in May 2001

–

–

- Adoption by Council before end-2001.
Germany presented an initiative in March 1999

Commission communication on an overall fraud prevention strategy in June 2000

The 2001-03 Action Plan presented in May 2001

In May 2001 the Commission presented a proposal for a Council and Parliament
Directive on the protection under criminal law of the Communities' financial interests

The Commission intends to present, before the end of 2001, a Green Paper on the
protection under criminal law of the Communities' financial interests and the
establishment of a European Public Prosecutor

The Commission intends to present, before the end of 2001, a proposal for a regulation on
a cooperation mechanism to combat criminal activities damaging the European
Communities' financial interests

47

Common definitions, charges and
penalties for offences linked with
terrorism17

Council, on a Commission
proposal

In September 2001 the Commission presented a proposal for a Council framework
decision on terrorism (see also the proposal for a Council framework decision on the
European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between the Member States.

- Parliament Opinion expected in November 2001

Parliament own initiative resolution in September 2001 on the role of the Union in
the fight against terrorism

Common definitions, charges and
penalties in the field of tax fraud

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or an
initiative by a Member State

17

See also table on “Mutual recognition of judicial decisions”.

48

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.

Objective: to deprive criminals of the proceeds of crime

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of play

Convention or framework decision
on financial crime, money
laundering

Council, on the basis of an
initiative by France

Concrete steps to trace, freeze,
seize and confiscate the proceeds
of crime

Adoption by the Council in June 2001 (French initiative) of a framework decision on
money laundering.

Adoption by the joint Ecofin/JAI Council in October 2001 of the protocol to the
convention on mutual assistance in judicial matters of 29 May 2000 in the fight
against organised crime

France, Belgium and Sweden presented, in February 2001, an initiative on the freezing of
assets and evidence.

- Parliament opinion in September 2001

- Council decision expected before the end of 2001

Objective: to enhance knowledge and the capacity to fight money-laundering activities

Member States

1990 Convention to be ratified by Luxembourg.

Conclusions adopted by Joint Council (Economic and Financial Affairs, Justice and Home
Affairs) in October 2000.

Implement fully the provisions of
the Money Laundering Directive,
the 1990 Strasbourg Convention
and the Financial Action Task
Force recommendations, including
implementation in all dependent
territories

(See also the first part of
measure 19 of the joint
programme on the mutual
recognition of criminal
convictions)

49

To adopt the draft directive
amending the Money Laundering
Directive

Council and Parliament

As soon as possible

Joint position adopted by the Council in November 2000

Parliament opinion on second reading in April 2001

Parliament opinion (following conciliation) expected in November 2001

Formal adoption by Council expected before end-2001.

Council decision in October 2000 on the basis of a Finnish initiative.

Conclusions of the joint Ecofin/JAI Council in October 2001 asking the Member
States to strengthen the existing arrangements and to consider the possibility of
devising an automatic system for the exchange of relevant financial information and
asking the Commission to consider the possibilities for Community financing for
such an automatic information system

More rapid exchange of
information between the existing
financial intelligence units (FIUs),
entitling judicial authorities and
FIU to receive information
regardless of secrecy provisions.

Council, on the basis of an
initiative by Finland

Council/Commission/
Member States

Community rules must be drawn
up to prevent use of non-EU
companies and organisations to
launder the proceeds of crime

Commission / Council /
Member States

Draw up a report identifying
provisions in national banking,
financial and corporate legislation
which obstruct international
cooperation

Prevent the excessive use of cash
payments and study the role of
casinos and gambling houses

Ensure the transparency of
financial transactions by electronic
means

Commission

Conclusions adopted by the Joint Council (Economic and Financial Affairs, Justice and
Home Affairs) in October 2000 call on the Commission to produce a report. Report
presented to the joint JAI/Ecofin Council on 16 October 2001.

Commission to initiate study

December 2003

Council/ Commission

December 2001

Extend the competence of Europol
to cover money laundering18 in
general, regardless of the offence

Council on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

Parliament opinion in November 2000.

In November 2000, the Council adopted a decision on widening the competence of

18

See also table on “Stepping up cooperation in the fight against crime”.

50

from which the proceeds originate

Improve the legal provisions
against money laundering with off-
shore and on-shore financial
centres and tax havens.

Support international action with
regard to off-shore countries.

Prepare a model agreement for
negotiations with off-shore and on-
shore financial centres and tax
havens

Council/ Commission/
Member States

The Joint Council (Economic and Financial Affairs, Justice and Home Affairs) adopted
conclusions in October 2000 on immediate and coordinated implementation of FATF
counter-measures.

Europol to cover money laundering in general (Portuguese initiative).

Conclusions of the joint Ecofin/JAI Council in October 2001 in accordance with the
conclusions of the extraordinary European summit held on 21 September 2001 on
the immediate and concomitant implementation of the countermeasures decided by
the FATF

December 2001

The Joint Council (Economic and Financial Affairs, Justice and Home Affairs) adopted
conclusions in October 2000 envisaging that agreements could be concluded in the long
term.

In line with the Joint Council (Economic and Financial Affairs, JHA) conclusions of
October 2000, the Commission is examining the usefulness and feasibility of a European
instrument

Preliminary report by the Commission on the surveillance of cross-border cash
flows, presented at the joint Ecofin/JAI Council in October 2001. The Commission
has been asked to present a final report before the end of 2001.

Examine possibilities:

Commission

July 2001

–

–

–

consistent

for strengthening and making
existing
more
national
on
cross-border
controlling
movements of money

provisions

for making
for
it
Member States to adopt such
provisions

easier

for organising exchanges of
information
between
Member States

51

5.

ISSUES RELATED TO INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL BORDERS AND VISA POLICY, IMPLEMENTATION OF ART. 62 EC AND CONVERTING THE
SCHENGEN ACQUIS

Objective: to develop a common visa policy

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of Play

Regulation on countries whose
nationals are respectively exempt
from or subject to the visa
requirement for crossing
external borders

Commission / Council

April 2001

Council adoption in March 2001 of the regulation (Commission proposal) which came into
force on 10 April 2001. In accordance with Article 8, the Commission reported on
Romania. Adoption of negotiating briefs for readmission agreements with Hong Kong and
Macao (see point 2.4).

In October 2001 the Commission presented a proposal for a Council Regulation
amending Regulation No 539/2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must
be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose
nationals are exempt from that requirement. The purpose is to introduce the visa
waiver for Romanian nationals from January 2002.

Procedure and conditions for
issuing visas by Member States

Commission/
Council/Member States

April 2003

In June 2000 Finland presented an initiative on measures for implementing the common
consular instruction

–

–

Parliament opinion (rejection) in March 2001

Adoption by the Council, in April 2001, of measures for implementing the common
consular instruction.

France proposed an initiative on a proposal for a Council decision on the visa
conditions applied by the Member States.

Belgium proposed an initiative relating to the amendment of Part VII and Annex 12 to
the common consular instruction.

Rules on a uniform visa

Commission / Council /
Member States

April 2001

The rules are taken into consideration under the existing framework of the Schengen
acquisand in connection with the proposal on the movement of persons within the
territory of the Member States.

Further development of the
technical specifications of the
uniform format for visas

Commission / Council

Short term measures
2000-2002 – long term
measures 2004

In October 2001 the Commission presented a proposal to amend Regulation 1683/95 on a
uniform format for visas

-Parliament opinion expected in February 2002.

52

Uniform format for forms for
affixing the visa to travel
documents which are not
recognised

Commission / Council /
Member States

2001

In March 2001 the Commission presented a proposal on the use by the Member States
of a secure, uniform format for forms.

- Parliament opinion expected in February 2002.

Proposal for a regulation on an
airport transit visa

Commission/
Council/Member States

April 2001

Airport transit arrangements are currently covered by a joint action and by the
Schengen acquis.

Closer cooperation between EU
consulates in third countries

Member States

Ongoing process

See point VIII of the common consular instruction and Recommendation of 4 March 1996.

Measures on the freedom to travel
within the territory of Member
States

Commission/
Council/Member States

April 2001

In July 2000 the French Presidency presented an initiative on travel on a long-stay visa.

- Parliament opinion (rejection) in January 2001

- Adoption by the Council end May 2001

In June 2000 the Portuguese Presidency presented an initiative on travel by nationals
exempt from the visa requirement.

- Parliament opinion (rejection) in March 2001

The Commission presented, in July 2001, a proposal for a directive on the conditions
in which third-country nationals may move freely in the territory of the Member
States for periods not exceeding three months, introducing a specific travel
authorisation and laying down the conditions for entry for a maximum of six months.

Objective: Further development of a common policy related to false documents

To render documents more
secure, introducing minimum
standards for travel documents
and residence permits

Commission/
Council/Member States

April 2001

In March 2001, the Commission presented a proposal on the communitarisation of the
uniform format for residence permits granted to third-country nationals.

Adoption in October 2000 of a resolution of the representatives of the Governments
meeting within the Council on minimum security standards for travel documents of EU
Member States.

To facilitate the detection of false
documents and to provide
appropriate training and
equipment

Commission/
Council/Member States

Ongoing process

Council Recommendation of 29 April 1999 on provision of staff and equipment

In March 2000 the Council adopted a decision to improve exchange of information.

53

Objective: Control at the external borders of the Union

Training programme financed by Odysseus programme in March 1998.

Commission/
Council/Member States

April 2001

Italy has presented a draft feasibility study on the development of joint actions cofinanced
by Odysseus

Close cooperation between the
Member States border control
services, such as exchange
programmes and technology
transfer

Procedure for adopting certain
measures implementing the
Common Manual

Commission / Council /
Member States

In October 2001 the B Presidency, with Odysseus co-financing, organised a joint
operation for controls at the Union’s future external borders in cooperation with
Europol, the Member States and the applicant countries.

Adoption by the Council in November 2000 of the decision to downgrade parts of the
Common Manual (French initiative).

Portugal tabled an initiative on measures implementing the provisions in the Common
Manual.

- Parliament opinion (rejection) in March 2001

- Adoption by the Council in April 2001

Rapid inclusion of the applicant
States in this cooperation

Commission / Council /
Member States

Ongoing process

Accession negotiations in progress

These issues were discussed at the ministerial meeting with the applicant countries on the
sidelines of the Council in March 2001

Objective: To convert and develop the Schengen acquis

Communitarisation of Article 2 of
the Schengen Convention

Council / Commission /
Member States

2001

The Commission intends to present a proposal in the second half of 2001.

Development of SIS II

Council / Commission /
Member States

Second half of 2001

The Commission intends to present a communication on the development of the
Schengen II information system in the second half of 2001.

54

6.

CITIZENSHIP OF THE UNION

Objective: To further facilitate the right of citizens to move and reside freely

Actions needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of play

/ Council

/

2001

The Commission intends to present a proposal before the end of the first half of 2001.

Directive updating and revising
the rules on the right of entry,
movement and residence of
citizens of the Union

Commission
Parliament

Regulation on security of travel
documents

Commission / Council /
Parliament

2001

In May 2001 the Commission presented the proposal for a European Parliament and
Council directive on the right of Union citizens and members of their families to
travel and reside freely on the territory of the Member States

Owing to the new Article 18(3) of the Nice Treaty, the Commission cannot present a
legislative instrument. But the attention of the Member States is drawn to the need
to implement the Resolution of 17 October 2000 of the representatives of the
Governments on security standards for passports and other travel documents.

Regulation on a uniform format for
residence permits for Union
citizens and members of their
families

Regulation to make it easier for
school groups consisting of Union
citizens and covered by
Community law to travel between
and through Member States

Commission / Council /
Parliament

2001

The Commission intends to present a proposal at the beginning of 2002.

Commission / Council /
Parliament

2001

Owing to the new Article 18(3) of the Nice Treaty concerning school groups
consisting of Union citizens and variable geometry for nationals of third countries,
the Commission does not intend to present a fresh proposal; but the Member
States’ attention is drawn to the need invited to implement the joint action of
30 November 1994.

Objective: Information on exercise of rights attached to Union citizenship

Communication on results of
elections to EP

Commission

2000

In December 2000 the Commission presented a communication on the application of
Directive 93/109/EC to the June 1999 elections to the European Parliament: right to
vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for citizens of
the Union residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals

First report on municipal elections

Commission

2001

A questionnaire was sent to Member States; once the results have been consolidated by
the Commission, it will present the report on municipal elections in December 2001

Third report on the citizenship of
the Union

Commission

By the end of 2000

The Commission drew up its third report in September 2001

55

7.

COOPERATION AGAINST DRUGS

Priorities of the EU drugs strategy

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 period 2000-2004 will also be assessed at mid-term and at completion, with the help of the European Monitoring Centre
for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) and Europol.

Objective: To implement the EU Drugs Strategy for 2000-04 endorsed by the European Council in Helsinki

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of Play

Report to the European Council on
an EU action plan on drugs (2000-
2004)

June 2000

European Union Action Plan to combat drugs (2000-2004) adopted by the Feira European
Council in June 2000.

Strengthening of cooperation with
the European Monitoring Centre
on Drugs and Drug Addiction and
Europol in particular as regards
synthetic drugs and precursors

Council / Commission/
Member States

In June 2001 the Commission presented a communication on the implementation of the
Action Plan

The Commission has presented two reports to the Council within the framework of the
Joint Action on new synthetic drugs, one on GHB and one on Ketamine. On that basis,
in March 2001 the Council adopted conclusions in line with the Commission's reports.

On the basis of an analysis of the risks of PMMA, the Commission will present a
report in December 2001.

Sweden presented an initiative for a Council decision establishing a system of special
forensic profiling analysis of synthetic drugs and an initiative for a Council decision on the
transmission of samples of illegal narcotic substances:

–

–

Parliament opinion May 2001

Adoption by the Council in May 2001 of the initiative concerning the
transmission of samples

Development of a methodology for
the evaluation of the EU Drugs

Council and Parliament on
the basis of proposals of the

Development by European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction in 2001 of
methodological instruments to evaluate anti-drug measures. Adoption in
September 2001 by the EMCDDA Board of the guidelines for the harmonised

56

Strategy for 2000-2004

Commission

implementation of five key epidemiological indicators.

Common definitions, charges and
penalties in the field of drug

trafficking

19

Council on the basis of a
Commission proposal

April 2001

The Commission presented, in June 2001, a proposal for a framework decision laying
down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the
field of drug trafficking

Financial instrument for combating
drug trafficking

Council, on the basis of a
Commission proposal or a
Member State initiative

–

Parliament opinion expected in February 2002

The Commission is considering including a chapter on the fight against drug
trafficking in the future financial framework programme under Title VI.

19

See also table on “Fight against certain forms of crime”.

57

8.

STRONGER EXTERNAL ACTION

Priorities of the European Council meetings in Tampere and Feira

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.

Objective: All the powers and instruments at the disposal of the Union, particularly in external relations, must be used in an integrated
and consistent way. Justice and home affairs concerns must be integrated into the definition and implementation of other Union policies
and activities

Action needed

Responsibility

Timetable for adoption

State of Play

Enlargement: ensure that
justice and home affairs are
consistently integrated into the
enlargement process

The Feira European Council was
to agree on clear priorities,
policy objectives and measures
for the Union’s external action
in Justice and Home Affairs

The Council, in close
cooperation with the
Commission, is to draw up
specific recommendations

June 2000

Implementation of priorities
identified for the progress
report requested by the Feira
European Council:

–

Negotiations with
non-applicant Balkan

58

Discussion with applicant countries at Council meeting on 15 and 16 March 2001 on
combating organised crime and asylum and immigration policy.

Public debate in September 2001 with applicant countries on trafficking in human
beings.

Adoption in September 2001 by Member States and applicant countries of the
12 undertakings on combating trafficking in human beings.

Ongoing negotiations on Chapter 24 (Justice and Home Affairs) and further
Community support to JHA through the Phare programme, partnership agreements
and participation in JHA programmes.

In June 2000 the Feira European Council adopted a report drawn up by the Council
and Commission on external relations in the JHA field, in order to integrate them
into the Union's overall strategy and thus to contribute to establishing the AFSJ.

Signing of agreements, including the JHA chapter, with Croatia and FYROM and
negotiations with the FRY and Albania extending to JHA matters. Follow-up to

countries of stabilisation
and association
agreements

Continuation of Barcelona
process

Concluding of readmission
agreements

Cooperation on justice and
home affairs

–

–

–

Zagreb summit through a regional JHA strategy for the CARDS programme (2002-06)
applying especially to asylum and immigration, and maintenance of a regional
dynamic for the reform of JHA institutions.

Reinforce the JHA dimension of the Meda programme; implementation of the action
plan of the High Level Working Group on Asylum and Immigration.

Negotiations underway for readmission agreements with Russia, Pakistan,
Sri Lanka, Morocco, Hong Kong and Macao.

Implementation of action plan with Russia on combating organised crime.

Preparation of an overall action plan with Ukraine.

Cooperation with the US: follow-up to the conclusions of the Gothenburg European
Council.

– Negotiation of multilateral

instruments

Council of Europe:

–

–

–

Convention on cybercrime: finalising of negotiations and signature before end
2001

2nd protocol to 1959 convention: finalising of negotiations

Community accession to Convention 108 and the additional protocol on data
protection: ratification underway by the contracting countries, prior to
accession to the Community.

United Nations Convention:

–

Organised crime: Proposed conclusions to be submitted by the Commission
on the Convention and the protocols relating to immigration and trafficking in
human beings and proposal presented on the signing of
the "firearms"
protocol.

59

–

–

Corruption: Preparation of a common negotiating stance and a mandate for the
Commission on Community matters.

Terrorism: On 21 September 2001 the European Council declared that the
European Union will support the Indian proposal to draw up, within the UN, a
Community general convention on combating international terrorism.

60

9.

OTHER CURRENT INITIATIVES

MEMBER STATES

TITLE

CONNECTION WITH TAMPERE/VIENNA

Finland

Germany

France

Council Regulation on obligations between the Member States for
the readmission of third-country nationals

Council Resolution on the undertaking by the Member States to
transmit information on illegal immigration and facilitator networks
under the Cirefi early warning system

Council Regulation (EC) on the mutual enforcement of judgments
on rights of access to children

State of progress

See "Management of migration flows"

- Parliament opinion [rejection] May 2000

- Discussion in the Council suspended

See "Management of migration flows"

See "Mutual recognition of judicial decisions in civil matters".

Parliament opinion in December 2000

Debate in the Council in November 2000

In parallel, Commission working document on family law adopted on
27 March 2001

Germany/Belgium/France

Council Decision on a customs investigations identification file

See "Stepping up cooperation in the fight against crime"

Finland

France

Sweden

Sweden

France

Belgium

Council Recommendation on the exchange of DNA

Adoption by the Council in June 2001 of a resolution on the exchange of
results of DNA analyses

Framework Decision establishing a European judicial training
network

- Discussion currently under way

Council Decision amending the staff regulations applicable to
Europol employees

Adoption by the Council in March 2001 of a Decision amending the staff
regulations applicable to Europol employees

Council Decision amending the remuneration of Europol employees
and the allowances paid to them

Adoption by the Council end May 2001

Council Recommendation regarding the assessment of terrorist
threats against VIPs

See "Fight against certain forms of crime"

Draft Resolution on the contribution of civil society in the
search for missing and sexually exploited children

Adoption by the Council in September 2001

61

Belgium and Sweden

Proposal for a Council Regulation and Decision concerning the
legal bases and financing of SIS II.

Work underway in Council with a view to adoption under Belgian
Presidency before the end of 2001 (the Commission will contribute a
communication in the second half of 2001)

Belgium, Spain and France

Draft Council Decision amending Article 40(1) and (7) of the
Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June
1985 on the gradual abolition of checks at common borders

Work in Council

Parliament consulted; opinion expected mid-February 2002

Netherlands

Proposal for a Council Decision setting up a European network
of contact points as regards persons responsible for genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Work ongoing in the Council.

62