European Parliament resolution on EU judicial cooperation with the United States in combating terrorism
Date: 2001-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: United States, cooperation agreement (EU), data protection, exchange of information, extradition, human rights, judicial cooperation, removal, terrorism

C 177 E/288

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

25.7.2002

Thursday 13 December 2001

13. EU judicial cooperation with the United States in combating terrorism

B5-0813/2001

European Parliament resolution on EU judicial cooperation with the United States in combating
terrorism

The European Parliament,

A.

recalling

(cid:11) the democratic values shared by the EU and the US, which are the foundation of their solid
commitment to the common fight against terrorism and of the trans-Atlantic solidarity manifested
following the attacks on 11 September 2001 in the framework of UN Security Council Resolution
1373,

(cid:11) the commitment to respect human rights, as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of
the European Union, as well as the principles of democracy and the rule of law contained in the
TEU, in particular Articles 2, 6, 11, 29 and 31 thereof,

(cid:11) the relevant international legal instruments, in particular the United Nations Convention against
Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the European Con-
vention on Human Rights and especially Protocol 6 of the ECHR on the death penalty, as well as
the Geneva Convention on refugee status (1951),

(cid:11) the relevant international and European legal instruments on data protection, namely the 1981
Council of Europe convention and Directives 95/46/EC of 24 October 1995 (1) and 97/66/EC of
15 December 1997 (2),

B.

in the expectation that, with due respect for the principles mentioned above, the European Union will
seek to establish before the end of the year a coherent legal framework, founded notably on the
following texts:

(cid:11) framework decisions on combating terrorism and creating a European arrest warrant,

(cid:11) Joint Investigation Teams and Eurojust,

(cid:11) extending Europol’s powers to exchange data with third countries the first of which will be the

USA,

(cid:11) freezing of assets,

(cid:11) list of terrorist organisations,

C. whereas, on the basis of this legal framework, the Union will therefore be in a position to negotiate a
judicial and police cooperation agreement in criminal matters with the USA, pursuant to Articles 24
and 38 of the TEU, aimed in particular at strengthening the common fight against terrorism,

D.

taking into account the requests made by the USA by letter of 16 October 2001 from President Bush
to the President-in-Office of Council, Guy Verhofstadt, and to Commission President, Romano Prodi,
and the fact that the list of 40 US proposals notably includes requests on:

(cid:11) revision of EU rules on data protection and privacy,

(cid:11) authorisation for police authorities to deal directly with US law enforcement authorities,

(cid:11) authorisation of exchange of information on the basis of an oral request,

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.
(2) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998, p. 1.

25.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 177 E/289

Thursday 13 December 2001

(cid:11) exploration of alternatives to extradition, including expulsion and deportation,

(cid:11) establishment of procedures to share information on immigration alerts for individuals associated

with terrorist organisations,

(cid:11) improvement of cooperation on the removal of status violators, criminals and ‘inadmissible per-

sons’,

taking into consideration the fact that the USA has adopted some extraordinary acts such as the
Patriot Act and the President’s executive order on military tribunals,

concerned that in some respects the American and European approaches are incompatible and that
this weakens the common fight against terrorism,

E.

F.

1.
Underlines that any international agreement on police and judicial cooperation signed by the Euro-
pean Union and its Member States must fully respect the ECHR and, consequently, the minimum pro-
cedural guarantees that are common to all Member States in their respective legal systems; the following
principles, in particular, must be observed:

(cid:11) not to limit in a disproportionate manner data protection standards (even if under a sunset clause) on

electronic surveillance provisions,

(cid:11) not to admit any discrimination between third-country and non-third country citizens that would be

contrary to the ECHR,

(cid:11) to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights as regards the monitoring of communications

between a prisoner and an attorney,

(cid:11) the procedural guarantees to a fair trial, as consolidated by the European Court of Human Rights;

Considers that the US Patriot Act, which discriminates against non-US citizens, and President Bush’s

2.
executive order on military tribunals are contrary to the principles established above;

3.
Considers that, such being the legal situation, legal problems could arise from the fact that the USA
considers terrorists as war criminals, whereas this is not the case in the EU; considers that, therefore, no
extradition could be allowed to the US from Member States for people who are to be tried before military
tribunals;

Expresses concern at the fact that the President’s executive order does not specify the limits on the
4.
court’s jurisdiction, makes no provision for the presumption of innocence and the right to an impartial
judge and, above all, allows sentences, including capital punishment, to be decided by a two-thirds major-
ity;

5.
Reiterates its request for a complete abolition of the death penalty in the USA and reminds Member
States that they are bound not only on the basis of their individual ratification of Protocol 6 of the ECHR
but also as members of the Union, in accordance with Article 6 of the Treaty; a general EU-USA agreement
cannot therefore be reached; extradition cannot take place if the defendant could be sentenced to death;

6.
Requests that expulsion or deportation proceedings should not be used as ‘disguised’ extradition
proceedings, and calls on the EU to guarantee European data protection standards that are proportionate,
effective and of limited duration and to ensure that no mandatory retention of data be allowed, which
would undermine rights and guarantees;

7.
Asks for the European Parliament to be fully informed and consulted before the adoption of any EU-
USA cooperation agreement in the field of JHA, and that the conclusion of such an agreement be con-
ditional upon a ruling confirming its conformity with EC law, established by the Court of Justice;

C 177 E/290

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

25.7.2002

Thursday 13 December 2001

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments of

8.
the Member States, the US Congress, and the US administration.

14. WTO meeting in Qatar

B5-0819/2001

European Parliament resolution on the WTO meeting in Qatar

The European Parliament,

(cid:11) having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2001, on the Fourth Ministerial Conference (1),

1. Welcomes the outcome of last month’s WTO Ministerial Conference in Qatar, which represents an
important step towards a new WTO, more responsive to the needs and interests of citizens;

2. Welcomes in particular the commitment in the Qatar declarations to redressing the imbalances
between developed and developing countries; notes with pleasure that the cohesion and assertiveness of
developing countries in Qatar and in the preceding weeks had a major impact both on the agreements
reached in Qatar and on the wider politics of the WTO, and urges the Commission to ensure that the
work programme is translated into outcomes which deliver real benefits to developing countries;

3.
Congratulates the Commission on the extent to which the agreements reached in Qatar reflected the
priorities laid down by the European Parliament, and acknowledges both the Council’s determined efforts
to support the Commission’s negotiations and the close cooperation with its delegation;

4. Welcomes the Qatar declaration on the TRIPS agreement and public health, reflecting a worldwide
recognition of the need to address appropriately urgent health needs, and the possibilities of a more flex-
ible application of intellectual property rights, and expects to see this agreement respected in practice by
all concerned; also welcomes the approval of the WTO waiver for the ACP-EU Cotonou Agreement;

5. Welcomes the prospect of greater opportunities for EU producers and gains for EU consumers,
through the opening of negotiations on more open markets; notes with approval that the text on agricul-
ture recognises non-commercial aspects and therefore permits the European Union to proceed with reform
of the CAP, shifting away from trade-distorting subsidies, especially where they penalise agricultural
exports from developing countries, whilst safeguarding instruments to ensure multifunctionality, and
underlines the importance in these negotiations of special and differential treatment for developing coun-
tries, to take account of their needs, such as rural development and food security; welcomes the inclusion
in the negotiations of all forms of agricultural export support as well as the protection of geographical
indications concerning agricultural products, namely wine;

Considers that the Qatar agenda represents a significant first step towards taking proper account in
6.
the WTO of the relationship between trade and the environment, but emphasises the need for progress on
the clarification of the precautionary principle in WTO rules as an important protection for environment
and food safety standards;

7.
Notes the reaffirmation in Qatar of the Singapore Ministerial’s commitment on labour rights; believes
that further progress is essential and calls on the WTO to cooperate with the ILO’s initiative on the social
dimension of globalisation;

(1)

‘Texts Adopted’, Item 13.