Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-23-Speech-1-099"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091123.18.1-099"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, for once in my life, that was good timing! Can I take this opportunity first of all to apologise for my colleague, Timothy Kirkhope, who is unable to be here. What I am about to do is to read the wise wisdom of all his words that he has thought out and put on paper. I will read his views as rapporteur to you. He is the rapporteur of the two reports of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.
Again, I would like to stress that we support the aims of the Council’s framework decision. However, again, there are problems regarding the legal basis of this initiative with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The report therefore calls for a rejection of the initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden and the Kingdom of Spain. The legal clarity regarding LIBE reports is unclear in light of the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. This report will be submitted at a later date under a legal basis that is clear. We would suggest that this would allow this important subject to be examined in more detail, as, again, the timetable imposed was very short and did not afford Parliament the time it would have wanted on such an important subject.
Firstly, I would like to focus on Timothy’s report on the draft Council Decision adopting the rules on the confidentiality of Europol information. The rules to be established are to apply security measures to all information which is processed by, or through, Europol: in other words, a common standard for protection of information that passes through communication channels between Europol and the national units of Member States.
Along with his fellow rapporteurs for the Europol package, they have endured a frustrating time negotiating the timescale and legality of the draft Council Decisions. Following President Klaus’s signature and therefore the Treaty of Lisbon becoming a reality, the negotiations with the Council and Commission have become obsolete. This report, along with his colleagues’ reports, calls for a rejection of the Council text.
He would like to make it clear that he supports the aim of the Council Decision, as we are in favour of better exchange of information, and recognise the benefits Europol brings to Member States regarding law enforcement and crime fighting.
We would like to keep Europol’s remit and scope small and specific and thereby make the agency as efficient and effective as possible. We also need to recognise that sovereign states have their role to play in that they control their national police forces and security services. However, without prejudice to the overall support of the European Police Office, with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and its effects on police cooperation, the rapporteur, and his fellow rapporteurs in the LIBE Committee, feel that there should be no amendments to the measures implementing the Europol decision until such measures can be adopted under the new legal framework provided by the Treaty of Lisbon.
We therefore call on the Council to withdraw its proposal and, as stated in the report, call on the Commission or the Council to make a declaration in plenary on a proposal for a new Europol decision, which shall be submitted six months following the date of entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.
Now I would like to turn to the second report on the initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden and the Kingdom of Spain for the adoption of a Council framework decision on accreditation of forensic laboratory activities. This is an initiative of Sweden and Spain on ensuring that laboratory activities are accredited by the accreditation body in order to combat crime through closer cooperation between law enforcement authorities in the Member States. Over the last couple of years, information exchange in the area of judicial and law-enforcement cooperation has become a high priority for the European Union and its Member States in the crime-prevention and crime-fighting potential.
The purpose of this draft framework decision is to ensure that the results of laboratory activities in one Member State are recognised as being equivalent to the results of laboratory activities in other Member States, thereby guaranteeing legal certainty to the suspects and improved judicial cooperation where evidence of one Member State is used in proceedings in another Member State.
This purpose is achieved by ensuring that laboratory activities are accredited by the accreditation body to comply with international standards. The framework decision would apply to laboratory activities relating to DNA and fingerprints, and each Member State ensures that the results of the accredited laboratory activities carried out in other Member States are recognised as equivalent to the results of the accredited domestic laboratory activities. However, it will, of course, always remain the responsibility of each individual judicial authority to assess any evidence, forensic or not, in accordance with its own national law."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples