Overeenstemming over uitwisseling van bewijs in strafzaken (en)

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - EU ministers have hammered out rules to make it easier and faster for judges and prosecutors to exchange evidence needed for cross-border investigations.

The so-called European evidence warrant - agreed by interior ministers in a meeting in Luxembourg on Thursday (1 June) - is a scheme designed to support the arrest warrant which paves the way for the faster transfer of criminal suspects across the EU.

It enables judges and law-enforcement officials to speedily exchange evidence - objects, documents and data - in 32 types of offences.

Austrian interior minister Liese Prokop hailed the agreement, achieved after hours of heated debate, as an important step to boost the "exchange of evidence so that we can co-operate and prosecute criminals more effectively."

Member states have been trying to agree on the details for almost three years, having started off with huge differences in their positions to finally reach unanimous agreement on Thursday.

EU justice commissioner Franco Frattini i said he had been "personally disappointed" by past disagreements but called Thursday's deal of "paramount importance".

German and Dutch sensitivities

Germany and the Netherlands featured as two key trouble-makers during the negotiations.

Berlin insisted on the possibility to double-check evidence requests on six types of crimes including terrorism and racism, arguing they were not defined clearly in the text and in line with the definitions in the country's own legislation.

This request was agreed but only under condition that member states would review this opt-out in a maximum of five years after the evidence warrant comes into force.

Mrs Prokop said that fellow ministers had to take into account the specific situation in Germany, but pointed out that "all the other countries have already adjusted their legislation" in order to meet the requirements of the evidence warrant.

The Dutch delegation proved even harder to convince as it pressed to keep its right to refuse to give out evidence in cases where a crime was committed on its territory.

According to diplomats, one of The Hague's particular fears was that its officials may be flooded with requests for evidence of drugs that citizens from other states had bought in the Netherlands, which has the most liberal drug laws in Europe.

The ministers finally agreed to the principle that a country's judicial authorities can refuse to deliver evidence in cases "where the offence concerned has been committed wholly or partly in the territory of the executing state."

But they agreed that such a decision must be taken exceptionally and on a case by case basis.

DNA and fingerprints to follow

At first the evidence warrant will apply for evidence which "exists and is readily available."

But Brussels will now work out rules to cover other evidence, such as that gathered by conducting interviews, by the monitoring of bank accounts, as well as carrying out bodily examinations or obtaining biometric data directly from the body of any person, including DNA samples or fingerprints.

The warrant will be a single document translated into the official language of the state to which it will be addressed, with the issuing country having "reasonable grounds to believe that relevant objects, documents or data are located" there.

The authorities of that state will then decide how to proceed to obtain the requested evidence.

The rules are set to be put into practise by member states within two years after the agreement comes into force.