Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-20-Speech-3-368"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
dcterms:Is Part Of
lpv:document identification number
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to thank all of my colleagues in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs for their cooperation on this report and particularly the shadow rapporteurs, Mrs Buitenweg, Mrs Vălean and Mrs Grabowska. With regard to the parliamentary measures proposed, I would highlight the following: with a view to guaranteeing the integrity and authenticity of the information forwarded, the Member State handing down the conviction shall be considered to be the owner or proprietor of the data relating to the sentences passed by their courts and tribunals; the future framework Decision must provide for a range of additional guarantees in the field of the protection of personal data; with regard to the definition of convictions, for the sake of consistency with other reports by this Parliament, the definition contained in the report by my esteemed friend and colleague, Mr Demetriou, must be retained; the inclusion of sentences in the register of criminal records of the Member State where the sentence was passed is a prior obligation, since it guarantees the authenticity and accuracy of the information forwarded; the information on sentences will therefore only be forwarded once it has been registered, but not before; it must be made clear that the deletion of criminal records depends not just on completing the sentence, but also on compliance with other additional conditions, such as fulfilling the civil responsibilities arising from the crime, or not re-offending within the time period laid down in law; it is necessary to establish clearly which legal framework will regulate the deletion of data, that is to say, whether the legislation of the Member State where the sentence is passed is applicable, or that of the State of nationality of the convicted person. With regard to the conditions for use, Mr Frattini, I genuinely share your concern regarding personal data. The proposal is much more restrictive than the provisions in force in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, which is justified by the speed with which information on criminal records can become out of date. Therefore, each time information on a person's criminal record is required for the purposes of a new criminal procedure, it will be necessary to submit a new request for information. I would like to end, Mr President, by calling upon the honourable Members to vote in favour of the proposed report, and I thank you for listening. Information on criminal convictions circulates between Member States under the mechanisms of the European Convention on Mutual Assistance on Criminal Matters of 1959, but there are serious difficulties with that mechanism. These deficiencies were demonstrated dramatically by the case of Fourniret, a French man sentenced in the 1980s to seven years in prison for the rape of a minor and then released after just two. We would discover years later that, between his release and his re-arrest in June 2003, Fourniret had murdered nine girls and was suspected of killing a further twelve. He had managed to evade judicial action for more than 14 years, simply by changing his residence from one Member State to another, and furthermore, to top everything, he even managed to get a job in a school. It was clear that the mechanisms for exchanging information on criminal records had to be modified and improved. The proposal for a Council framework decision intends to replace the information exchange mechanisms regulated in Article 22 of the Convention of 1959 and repeal the decision of 21 November 2005, all with a view to guaranteeing that the Member State of nationality is in a position to provide a correct, rapid and exhaustive response to requests for information that it receives with regard to convictions of its nationals. Of the measures included in the Council’s proposal, we must highlight the following: the principle of centralising information is retained; a framework is established for contributing to, designing and implementing a computerised system for the exchange of information on criminal convictions, based on the use of a standard European format that makes it possible to exchange information in a standard, computerised and easily translatable form by means of automated mechanisms; the principle of obligatory forwarding to the Member State of nationality is taken up, eliminating the dispensation of notification when the person also has the nationality of the Member State passing the sentence; and, finally the obligation to conserve the information forwarded to the State of nationality is laid down."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:


The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph