Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-17-Speech-4-239"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010517.12.4-239"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. I should like to start by offering Mr Di Lello Finuoli my warmest thanks for and expressly welcoming this remarkable report. As the European Council in Tampere stressed, the concept of the mutual recognition of decisions by the courts and judicial authorities is an important cornerstone in the area of freedom, security and justice which we hope to create in Europe.
The concept originates from the internal market. It is based on mutual trust in the various systems of the Member States and a number of common, underlying legal principles. Which is why it cannot be considered in isolation and must be complemented by other measures, such as greater harmonisation of substantive and procedural criminal law in the Member States, better mutual understanding and better training and further training.
The Tampere conclusions called on the Council and the Commission to present a programme by the end of last year. The most important contribution by the Commission was last summer's communication on the mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters, in which we set out the Commission's approach to this section of the more comprehensive area of mutual recognition.
As this is a new and complicated issue, our communication does not aspire to find final, binding answers to the questions raised, it simply tries to point the way to possible solutions. What we tried to do was ask the right questions and offer possible options as to how to proceed.
I was delighted that Mr Di Lello Finuoli's report basically shares the Commission's view and calls on the Commission to keep on the same track. Implementing the principle of mutual recognition in judicial cooperation on criminal matters is an ambitious task which entails a fundamental shift in perspective from traditional forms of cooperation to a cooperative division of tasks.
This new attitude will result in a series of substantive and practical initiatives, as cited in the joint Council and Commission programme of November 2000. Some of the projects proposed in the programme have already been started. The Commission undertook in its programme of work to present proposals on facilitating extradition, including the idea of a European arrest warrant, before the summer recess.
We are also considering whether joint standards could be implemented to protect individual rights in criminal proceedings. I cannot go into all thirty points of the motion for a resolution here and now. Although the Commission's attitude towards it is very positive overall, I should like to mention one point on which we have our doubts and which was also addressed during the debate. The resolution calls for full application of the
principle. The Commission supports this, especially as this principle is included in our new Charter of Fundamental Rights. However, the Commission entertains some doubt as to whether it makes sense, in cases in which there are in fact several decisions in various Member States, only ever to apply the decision that is most favourable to the offender.
The European Council in Tampere adopted ambitions plans in the area of justice and home affairs. We must face the fact in our daily work that the devil is in the detail. Numerous details illustrate that mutual trust in the various judicial systems of the Member States has not yet developed to the point needed in order to exercise mutual recognition. Obviously it would be helpful to push this development forward.
I am sure that we shall achieve the necessary political momentum if Parliament comes out clearly in favour of developing the principle of mutual recognition. This would perhaps add the political weight which we need, and which is lacking, in order to tip the balance in favour of more comprehensive recognition of decisions. It is time we put flesh on the bones of the theoretical concept of mutual recognition."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples