A very big effort is always made following commercial disasters such as shipwrecks or airplane crashes, and following humanitarian disasters such as earthquakes or tsunamis. A well-oiled system swings into operation, albeit that respect for the rights of the dead and their surviving family members, may not be the sole or main concern of those who are or may be responsible for the disaster, with commercial considerations normally playing a part. Nevertheless, full investigations take place. Conventions and protocols apply. There is painstaking collection of evidence and of data as a matter of routine, and there will be detailed reports, payment of compensation, and surviving family members will be enabled to identify, bury and mourn their dead.
The five year deadline for agreement on the common EU immigration and asylum policy expired on 1 May 2004. This article examines the key decisions, how they were taken and what they will mean for asylum-seekers.
(Council docs. 13689/02; 13689/02 add 1; and 13996/02)
The Charter should become part of the treaties, subject to a number of important clarifications made to its horizontal provisions as regards competence, limitation clauses, and rights other than those based on the EC/EU Treaties and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The European Union should also be granted competence to accede to the ECHR.
The Commission's recent Communication on border control (COM (2002) 233) sets out a number of proposals for developing common control of the EU's external borders. The principal elements in this plan are a 'common unit' of senior border control officials to control the implementation of a common border control policy; further exchange of information between a large number of authorities, including the Schengen Information System, the visa information database, police authorities and Europol; and the development of a Common European Border Corps with powers to check people at the border, deny them entry, board vessels and arrest individuals.
Submission by Statewatch to the House of Lords Select Committee on the European Union, sub-committee "E" on the proposal to combat terrorism
Many of the “operational" initiatives in the Conclusions and the "roadmap" concern the creation of ad hoc, informal, groups, targets and cooperation. There is little or no mention of accountability to the European parliament or national parliaments. No mention at all of data protection or to recourse to courts for individuals who might be affected. Moreover, there is a real danger that these "temporary" arrangements will become permanent leaving a whole layer of EU inter-agencies informal groups, information and intelligence exchanges and operational practices quite unaccountable.
In sum, the “anti-terrorism” programme amounts to little more than the fast-tracking of a raft of law enforcement legislation that was already on the EU’s agenda and goes well beyond the investigation and prosecution of terrorism
The following analysis comments on the context of the proposal; the future of the proposal; the legal effect of the proposal if adopted; and the text and civil liberties implications of each Chapter of the proposal.
The Council has expressed its intention to fast-track two Framework Decisions on terrorism and the European Arrest Warrant, both of which were due to be proposed at this time anyway. The proposal on terrorism has raised concerns because it includes a definition that could also cover protests and “urban violence”.
Statewatch submission to UK House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee inquiry into democracy and accountability in the EU and the role of national parliaments
Spotted an error? If you've spotted a problem with this page, just click once to let us know.