FTI’s response to Commission’s proposals for Stockholm Programme

The Swedish presidency of the EU will commence on 1 July 2009. One of its major tasks will be developing a new 5 year programme (the Stockholm Programme) on justice and home affairs. On 10 June the European Commission published its proposals for the Stockholm Programme: these will provide the basis for detailed discussions among representatives of the European Parliament and the European Council aimed at enabling the latter to adopt its five-year legislative programme by the end of 2009. The Commission’s proposals refer to the need to put ordinary citizens’ interests at the heart of the project. But few concrete proposals are made about how to achieve this.

FTI will be urging Europe’s new MEPs to ensure that fundamental rights are given their proper place at the heart of European justice policy. European cooperation in the fight against crime must not be at the expense of basic principles of justice and fairness – as has sadly been the case under the last 5 year programme.

FTI fully accepts that member states should cooperate in combating crime. But we are concerned that the last ten years of EU justice policy have been dominated by the security and crime control agenda, with insufficient focus on fundamental rights. Increased cooperation between states should have been accompanied by strengthening procedural defence rules in all states. Without this, states cannot trust each other’s systems to deliver justice to the necessary standard.

Senior Swedish officials with whom FTI has recently met in Brussels have confirmed to FTI that minimum procedural safeguards will be a key priority for the Swedish presidency. FTI welcomes this, but is realistic about the scale of the challenge required to make all Member States share this conviction and to persuade future presidencies similarly to prioritize this key issue. We will be keeping the pressure on to make sure they do.

But FTI is concerned that the need for binding legislative standards on procedural rights could be sidelined, despite their being mentioned in the proposals. Only a few lines in the Commission’s 32 page proposals actually refer to them, and no detail is offered as to how they should be introduced. Instead, the safeguards will not in fact be developed within the framework of the Stockholm Programme itself, but will be dealt with in a separate “Roadmap” published this week.

The first right dealt with under the Roadmap will be the right to interpretation and translation. The Commission has told us its proposals for a Framework Decision on this have already been worked out in conjunction with Swedish representatives. We anticipate publication on 8 July 2009 and will review the documents carefully when released.
Sadly the momentum that led to the 2004 proposal for a Framework Decision on minimum procedural safeguards across Europe has been lost. A lot of work is necessary to rebuild anything approaching a similar political consensus. Part of the problem is the lack of public engagement in the area of defence rights and the absence of debate on the subject, particularly in the wake of the Madrid and London terrorist attacks.

The importance of NGOs’ input to address this deficit of engagement cannot be underestimated. When that input can be accompanied by real-life stories from FTI clients who have experienced the “area of freedom, security and justice” at the sharp end, it can be invaluable. FTI’s campaigns and lobbying work over the coming months will be aimed at maximising that experience to hammer home the need for greater protections.

Some of our other concerns based on the Commission’s proposals for the Stockholm Programme are:

Data sharing and privacy: The proposals envisage increased automated transmission of personal data between member states and into the European Police Office (“Europol”). They also envisage extensions to the way this personal data can be used. We must ensure data use and sharing are proportionate to what is strictly necessary.

Criminal evidence: The Stockholm Programme will implement and build further on recent European laws requiring states to share criminal evidence (including DNA evidence and the results of intrusive surveillance), when requested by other states. We will continue to press for enhanced EU-wide rules to ensure the fair handling of such evidence. No new evidence sharing powers should be enacted till these protections take effect.

Technology in Justice: While we welcome the Commission’s intention to improve access to justice, we are concerned at some of the proposals for achieving this. E-Justice must be properly handled so citizens can be confident about accurate content. Automated translations are not appropriate in criminal justice, where accuracy is essential. While video-conferencing of hearings can sometimes serve the interests of justice, defendants’ rights can also be compromised, so prior consent should generally be obtained.

As the Stockholm Programme is rolled out, FTI will analyse every aspect of it that affects ordinary people’s everyday experience of criminal justice across EU borders. We will campaign for fair, proportionate and consistent treatment for everyone.