Presentatie van Zweedse minister voor Commise van burgelijke vrijheden, justitie en binnenlandse Zaken van het Europees Parlement over prioriteiten van het Zweeds Voorzitterschap (en)

• - 

  The spoken word takes precedence, check against delivery -

Mr Chairman,

Honourable members of the LIBE Committee,

Let me start by congratulating you, both those re-elected and those elected for the first time, to your important tasks in the European Parliament. I would also like to congratulate Mr Lopez Aguilar on his appointment as Chairman of the LIBE Committee. The Swedish Presidency and I look forward to our important collaboration. Today, I shall present the priorities of the Swedish Presidency in the sphere of freedom, security and justice to you. This afternoon, my colleague Tobias Billström, Minister for Migration and Asylum Policy, will inform you about the ambitions in the area of asylum, migration and visa policy.

When it comes to the fight against cross-border crime and the strive for increased security the challenges are vast. Drug trafficking, human trafficking and terrorism are a reality on our continent at the same time as we have new types of crime, for example with the aid of Internet. Cross-border international cooperation between authorities has been developed. However, more remains to be done to achieve efficient European judicial cooperation and police cooperation in all relevant respects. 

Common problems require common solutions. The organized crime in Europe takes no account of the borders between our countries. Therefore, wee cannot allow neither national nor administrative borders to hinder the crime prevention authorities from performing their work effectively.

Combating crime is important from a citizen perspective. The citizens expect EU cooperation to facilitate measures against cross-border crime.  The citizens also expect freedom and justice. Our efforts to obtain security must not take place at the expense of the individual’s integrity and right to privacy. Our work is consistently based on the Citizen Perspective.

Honourable Committee Members,

The European Union is at a constitutionally crucial stage. I hope and look forward to confirmation of the Lisbon Treaty in the near future. The Lisbon Treaty will entail important changes in the area of Justice and Home Affairs, not least the strengthened role of the European Parliament. I look forward to close and good cooperation with the European Parliament and the LIBE Committee in the future.

The adoption of the Stockholm Programme, the new five-year programme that is to replace the present Hague Programme, is one of the most important tasks for the Swedish Presidency.

The aim of the Swedish Presidency is for the Stockholm Programme to be ambitious, long term and well-balanced.

• - 

  Ambitious to the extent that it should reflect the increasing importance of EU cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs in recent years and establish clearer political guidance for what we should achieve.
• - 

  Long term through the established goals laying the foundation for continued efficient and reinforced cooperation continuing beyond the five years initially covered by the programme.
• - 

  Well balanced in such a way that the programme should balance measures of a more repressive kind with measures to protect the personal integrity and the fundamental rights of the individual.

In the continued work with the Stockholm Programme, the point of departure is the Communication proposed by the Commission in June. The Stockholm Programme was discussed for the first time by ministers at the informal ministerial meeting in Stockholm in July. Chairman Lopez Aguilar also participated on that occasion, which was greatly appreciated.

The impressions from the discussions in Stockholm are that there is generally a common vision around the main aspects of the Communication.

Many of my ministerial colleagues underlined the importance of the citizen perspective adopted by the Commission in the Communication. Future cooperation should be focused on measures that really produce added value for EU citizens.

Other issues on which there was common agreement were the need for better analysis and evaluation of EU legislation and its effects.

Other matters which were highlighted were the need to consolidate and to improve the quality of EU legislation and to make it more comprehensible and accessible, to the public as well as to professionals. I would like these issues to be emphasized in the programme.

Many stressed the importance of, but also the problems with, mutual trust in one another’s judicial and administrative systems. In my view, we agree that trust of this kind is essential for effective cooperation. Measures to strengthen mutual trust such as the expanded educational measures and exchange programmes as proposed by the Commission can be a way of increasing understanding and cooperation. (This might, for example, involve a kind of “Erasmus” exchange for judges, prosecutors and police.)

Another important measure to strengthen mutual trust is of course, to reach agreement as soon as possible on common minimum rights for the accused in criminal cases. I hope to achieve some of the interim objectives relating to this issue during the Presidency. However, it is also important to include more far-reaching measures in the Stockholm Programme. In order to gain acceptance for measures intended to increase citizens’ security, measures are also needed that safeguard legal security and the rights of the individual.

As regards operational cooperation, a number of delegations at our informal ministerial meeting expressed their support for a stronger role for Europol. Europol can serve as the hub of European police cooperation, but can also play an important role in a greater international context.

As regards the fight against organized crime, a number of types of crime are mentioned in the Commission’s Communication, pilot areas, which should serve as criminal policy priorities for trying out ideas and methods. These are trafficking in human beings, terrorism, exploitation of children, drugs trafficking, IT-related crime, forgery, economic crime and corruption. These are all crimes that need to be tackled at EU level. It is positive that the Member States seem to agree on these priorities.

During the discussions at the informal ministerial meeting, a number of colleagues also drew attention to the importance of the external relations. We will need to devote greater scope to this issue in the future programme.

To sum up, my impression of the discussions at the informal ministerial meeting in Stockholm is that there is to a great extent a common vision of the main outlines of the future cooperation. It is now the task of the Presidency to take into account the points of view put forward and to ensure that these are incorporated into the draft programme that we will present and negotiate during the autumn.

I am hoping to have close contacts with the European Parliament in this work and I am looking forward to receiving the resolution that the European Parliament will present later during the autumn.

My State Secretary, Mr Magnus Graner, has, together with the State Secretary for asylum and migration issues, a special responsibility for leading the negotiations on the drafting of the Stockholm Programme. They will visit both the LIBE and the JURI Committees later this month. The Minister for Migration and Asylum Policy, Mr Tobias Billström, and I will get back to you later in the autumn to discuss the future programme. We are both particularly looking forward to the discussion during the European Parliament’s November session in Brussels.

Honourable Committee Members,

Openness in the EU is an important issue to strengthen the trust and understanding of citizens for the work we perform and to counteract mismanagement and corruption within the administration. Openness is traditionally a profile issue for Sweden and an issue that I know that the European Parliament also safeguards. The present Regulation on Public Access to EU documents was adopted during the previous Swedish Presidency in the spring of 2001. Some of you were involved then and are still active in the work of the ongoing review of the regulation.

I consider that the current regulation to a large extent has worked well. It contains well balanced solutions between the public’s interest in openness and the need to be able to protect sensitive information. At the same time, there is an interest in clarifying and modifying the legislation in the light of how it has been applied and in line with the case law of the European Court of Justice. The Swedish Presidency is prepared to drive negotiations forward actively, with the aim of achieving a satisfactory end result during the autumn. This will require hard work and a willingness to make constructive contributions.

The Council has recently completed a second technical review of the proposal. A number of issues remain to be resolved although there is now a somewhat clearer picture of the positions in the Council. The Council is eagerly waiting to see how the European Parliament will act.

On the part of the Swedish Presidency, we now hope that we together, with the same commitment and good cooperation as in 2001, can find solutions that provide a better and more effective regulatory framework for transparency in the EU. 

Honourable Committee Members,

As I mentioned initially, common problems require common solutions. The borderless Europe is misused by organized crime and we cannot allow the internal borders in Europe to set limits for combating cross-border crime. Well-developed police collaboration between Member States, including effective systems for exchange of information, exchange of experiences and well-developed working methods, is fundamental for tackling these problems.

The Swedish Presidency regards the European Police Office, Europol, as an important tool for facilitating cross-border police cooperation within the EU. Europol is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year and has over the years acquired an increasingly important role in the struggle against cross-border crime in Europe. On 1st  October, the Presidency, in collaboration with Europol, will arrange a special informal ministerial meeting in The Hague for further discussions on the role and potential of Europol. The chairman of the LIBE Committee is, of course, invited to this meeting.

An important part of effective cross-border cooperation against crime is also an efficient and needs-adapted exchange of information.

Our different national police organizations have information that they sometimes need to exchange with one another. This takes place within the framework of regular judicial cooperation. The contribution that we can make at the EU level is, in certain cases, to standardize, to adapt to needs and thus make this exchange of information more effective, while at the same time ensuring that it complies with the fundamental requirements on data protection and respect for personal integrity.

Then there is certain information that we have either collected together or where we agree on certain minimum requirements for which information every Member State should collect and how long it should be saved. In these cases it is important that not more information than necessary is collected and that no information is stored for longer than necessary.

What we hope to achieve during the Swedish Presidency is a cohesive strategy for how the future exchange for both these types of information should work. The purpose of all information exchange is to fight serious crime. There is no interest or need in neither registering information about the daily activities of ordinary citizens, their political or religious views, nor other private concerns. We shall create a Europe where cross-border crime is efficiently combated at the same time as personal integrity is respected. This is not an impossible equation but a necessity.

The Swedish Presidency has chosen also to focus on other aspects related to the exchange of information. It is important for the mutual trust within the EU that the information exchanged is reliable and of high quality. This applies not least in exchange of evidential material in the form of DNA and fingerprints.

Forensic science has developed into a basic part of the work of the judicial authorities for instituting criminal proceedings against crime. Forensic technology is used as evidence to link suspected perpetrators to a crime, although it can also be used to free innocent people from suspected crimes.

The Swedish Presidency has together with the subsequent Spanish Presidency presented an initiative for accreditation of forensic laboratories. Common standards for forensic data guarantee that the information and the data exchanged are compatible and useable throughout the EU. Our aim is for this initiative to be adopted before the end of the year.

Honourable Committee Members,

The keystone for judicial cooperation within the EU is mutual trust. This comprises trust between our national authorities but also that our citizens should feel confident about the measures we have decided upon. Not least, the authorities in the Member States must be able to trust one another sufficiently to recognize and enforce one another’s judgments and decisions.

The perhaps most important trust-building measure is to guarantee citizens certain minimum levels with regard to access to justice regardless of where they are in the Union. Our citizens must feel secure and assured that they are guaranteed certain fundamental rights if they encounter legal problems in another Member State. This concerns simple things, such as a person being informed of what he or she is accused of in a language the person understands and the rights that he or she has in the judicial process, regardless of whether he or she is a perpetrator or a victim of crime.

This is the background to why the Swedish Presidency has chosen to resume the negotiations on procedural rights. It was a great disappointment for me personally when the Member States did not succeed in reaching agreement on a framework decision at the time of previous negotiations on the issue and I know that many members of the European Parliament were also discontented. My impression, after having discussed this issue with practically all of my Minister of Justice colleagues as well as with Vice President Barrot, is that the prerequisites for achieving success are better this time. If we cannot make more progress in this area, we risk distorting our collaboration so that measures that guarantee the legal security of the individual are not given sufficient scope.

The goal for the Swedish Presidency is for the Member States to be able to reach agreement on a road map for how to deal with procedural rights step-by-step. This is about concrete and result-focused instruments that will entail real added value for the ordinary citizen. A first step on this road map will be to reach agreement on a common instrument on interpretation and translation.

I view this as an important instrument which benefits our citizens and I hope for the support of the European Parliament in this work.

At the same time as we must be able to guarantee fundamental rights for those accused of crimes within the EU, we must also assure victims of crime that their interests and rights are taken care of correctly. Being a victim of crime is unpleasant, sometimes even traumatic. This is perhaps particularly the case when a crime is committed against a person in another Member State than the usual state of residence. The crime victim may often not understand the language or know about the workings of the judicial system and the possibilities that exist to obtain support and assistance.

Free mobility within the EU and increasing travel means that people to an increasing extent are exposed to crime in other Member States than the state they live in. It is important that citizens can rely on being able to obtain protection, support and assistance as well as relevant information in a language they understand if they are exposed to crime within the EU.

The goal of the Swedish Presidency in this sphere is to reach agreement on a strategy for continued work to strengthen the position of victims of crime in Europe and to establish principles that are to guide the future work in this area. This concerns, for example, striking a fair balance between the rights of the victim and the rights of the perpetrator, correct and professional treatment in contacts with the judicial system, and respect for non-discrimination of victims of crime due to age, sexuality, ethnic affiliation, religion or disability. Furthermore, victims of crime should be offered appropriate assistance and protection before, during and after the judicial proceedings, as well as being offered adequate compensation for the injury or damage they have suffered in crimes of violence.

I know that this is an issue that the European Parliament has previously highly prioritized and I hope for your support and constructive cooperation in the work to strengthen the rights of victims of crime in Europe.

Honourable Committee Members

There are a number of areas where collaboration between the EU Member States is of utmost importance. For example in the fight against cross-border organized crime where, in particular, human trafficking makes me personally indignant and demands strong measures. EU collaboration is also necessary when it comes to the protection of weaker citizens, such as the protection of children against child pornography and other sexual exploitation.

The fight against trafficking in human beings is a highly prioritized  issue for the Swedish Presidency. Trafficking with exposed and vulnerable people, women and children, for sexual or other dubious purposes is a despicable crime, which must be forcefully combated. In this work, international collaboration is essential for success and European cooperation is of central importance. During the autumn, negotiations will take place in the Council on a framework decision on trafficking in human beings which we hope to reach agreement on before the end of the year. The framework decision will constitute an important tool in EU cooperation against trafficking in human beings.

However, it is not enough with common EU cooperation in this area. We must work together with third countries, the countries of origin and transit countries, to achieve results.

The Swedish Presidency has chosen to place the fight against trafficking in human beings high on the agenda in meeting with third countries and we will also organize an international ministerial conference on this topic here in Brussels on 19-20 October. We hope that this conference will result in an exchange of good ideas and experiences in this field for drafting an “Action Oriented Paper” on the topic of human trafficking. We will also support initiatives for bilateral partnerships to strengthen cross-border cooperation to combat trafficking in human beings.

The European Parliament is, of course, invited to the conference in October and we look forward to your participation.

Another important issue that requires common efforts concerns security for our children. Apace with the swift development of technology, threats against our children have become more and more tangible. Internet has no country borders and has made crimes such as child pornography and other sexual exploitation cross-border in their nature. A cross-border and modern approach is required here to deal with the perpetrators effectively.

In June, the Commission presented a proposal on a Framework Decision on Sexual Exploitation of children. The negotiations on this instrument are prioritized by the Swedish Presidency. The instrument will also handle the problems connected with sex tourism and grooming, when adults seek up children on the net for sexual purposes. It is very important that the EU takes action also in these areas.

The Swedish Presidency will also support other methods of cooperation to combat sexual exploitation of children. One important instrument in this work will be to initiate and support voluntary European Financial Coalitions against child pornography on the Internet. This involves banks, credit card companies, and Internet service providers working together to stop on-line payments for purchase of child pornography. I believe that this type of modern cooperation methods is necessary to combat sexual exploitation on a broad front.

Honourable Committee Members,

The Swedish Presidency will drive a number of initiatives forward with a view to improving and making more effective the cooperation between the judicial authorities. We have, inter alia, with fifteen other co-sponsors presented an initiative on transfer of proceedings which now is being discussed in the Council. Transfer of proceedings means when a crime investigation in process is moved from one state to another for continued investigation and possible prosecution.

In an area with freedom, security and justice, there should be a common judicial framework for transfer of proceedings between Member States. The increased cross-border crime leads increasingly to overlapping jurisdictions and that several states are competent to try a person for the same deed. It is important that the trial takes place in the country which is most suitable according to established criteria.

Developed cooperation around transfer proceedings shall be regarded as a complement to the present judicial cooperation. The measure may be an alternative to more repressive measures, such as use of the European Arrest Warrant. The proposal also provides for the interests of the victims of crime being taken into consideration when applying the instrument. This includes particularly a right for the victim of crime to be informed about the intended transfer.

The instrument entails more efficient institution of legal proceedings against crimes which are being investigated in different Member States, with increased predictability and legal security as a result. The instrument will be valuable in investigations which concern, for example, trafficking in human beings, an offence where the various components of the crime often take place in different countries. By transferring proceedings and focusing on an integrated investigation, the possibilities of bringing to trial and sentencing the guilty correctly increase. Our aim is for this instrument to be adopted before the end of the year.

Mr Chairman,

Honourable Members of the LIBE Committee,

These were some of most important issues under my responsibility during the Swedish EU Presidency. Let me conclude by again emphasizing my hope for close cooperation with the European Parliament, and with the LIBE Committee in particular, in the coming months.

Thank you for your attention. I now look forward to listening to your comments and answering your questions.

Thank you!