EC Communication on the role of Eurojust and the European Judicial Network - guide

The European Commission has approved a Communication on the role of Eurojust and the European Judicial Network in the context of the fight against organised crime and terrorism. The Communication sets out the Commission's views on possible improvements. It will be discussed with EU Member States at a Seminar in Lisbon 29 and 30 October 2007.

Why is the European Commission presenting this Communication?

The Hague Programme invites the Council to consider the "further development of Eurojust", on the basis of a COM proposal. Furthermore, under the Action Plan for the Hague Programme, COM should have presented a proposal for a 'European law' (on the basis of the Constitution) on Eurojust in 2006. In view of the developments regarding Constitution/Reform Treaty, COM decided to first adopt a Communication on the development of Eurojust and the EJN. Subsequently a legislative proposal could be issued in 2008, depending on the outcome of the Lisbon Seminar at which the Communication will be discussed with the Member States.

What is the next step? Is the Commission planning to present a legislative proposal?

The Communication will be discussed at the Lisbon Seminar with the Member States (29-30 October 2007). Simultaneously, the COM carries out an Impact Assessment to examine impacts of different options to improve Eurojust and EJN. The results of this study are expected end February. Depending on the outcome of the Seminar and this Impact assessment, it will be decided whether or not to put forward a legislative proposal in 2008.

Does the Commission intend to establish a European Public Prosecutor's Office from Eurojust in the future?

It is true that the Reform Treaty contains an Article on the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor's Office. However, in my view it is too early to discuss this possible development. At this moment, I would rather focus on the short and mid term possibilities for strengthening Eurojust.

What are the current tasks of Eurojust and the European Judicial Network (EJN)? What are the differences?

Eurojust's task is to stimulate and improve cooperation and coordination between the competent judicial authorities of the Member States when investigating and prosecuting transnational organised crime. Eurojust operates through its national members or as a College. National members (and their deputies/assistants) are based in The Hague. They consider operational cases in which coordination or judicial cooperation between Member States is needed

The task of EJN is to facilitate judicial cooperation by establishing appropriate contacts between the authorities involved and providing practical and legal information. The network operates through its contact points in the Member States. The EJN website is an important tool for distribution of information. Every Member State has appointed a number of contact points. They are usually public prosecutors or civil servants working for the judicial cooperation unit in the Ministry of Justice. EJN is horizontal, flexible and informal network.

All 27 Member States are represented at Eurojust. The College of Eurojust exists of all 27 national members. A number of Member States have also appointed deputy national members and assistants to the national members.

Why is strengthening of Eurojust needed?

MS rely more and more on Eurojust when investigating and prosecuting transnational organised crime. Therefore, Eurojust needs to have sufficient powers to fulfil its tasks as efficient as possible. Currently, the emphasis of Eurojust's tasks is on coordination of investigations and prosecutions regarding transnational organised crime. If the national members and the College are provided with more powers, they can play a more active role in the operational work of Eurojust, which will contribute to the fight against transnational organised crime.

Which proposals are put forward in the Communication?

The proposal put forward in the Communication can be divided in three categories. These proposals are all possible under the current Treaty:

(a) increasing the powers of the national members

The national members should have autonomous powers conferred on them by their home State to ensure that they are able to carry out all the roles and tasks that Eurojust requires. The tables in the Communication show which Member States have conferred which powers on their national members. These need to be harmonised so that all national members have the same (minimum) set of powers. National members must have automatic access to all the necessary information stored in the database of their national systems (date relating to terrorist cases, criminal records, DNA, national prison records etc.).

In order to ensure continuity, stability and certainty, national members should have a mandate that is at least 3 years (preferably renewable) and that does not allow for suspension or dismissal (other than in exceptional cases of breach of professional conduct for example).

(b) enhancing the powers of the Eurojust College by promoting currently underused powers

The College has certain powers that are not currently used such as deciding cases of concurrent European Arrest Warrants. Steps should be taken to promote the College's decision making role. Also, the College's role as mediator when conflicts of jurisdiction occur should be improved.

(c) promoting increased cooperation with the EJN

Since EJN and Eurojust have similar objective, close cooperation between them should be established. This could be achieved by ensuring that each Member States designated one national (coordinating) EJN contact person who, at the same time, will act as Eurojust's national correspondent. The contact person should send Eurojust all information about cross border cases on the national territory.

The following proposals must be considered as long-term perspectives. They require a new legal basis.

• Strengthen powers of national members

Commission considers the following powers: initiating criminal procedures in the home state of the national member; setting up and participating in Joint Investigation Teams and executing specific investigative measures.

• Reinforce powers of the College

Commission considers the following powers: to decide on conflicts of jurisdiction and conflicts in the area of application; to initiate investigations in a MS and suggest the prosecution on its territory and to initiate a European investigation, in particular regarding crime against the financial interest of the Union.

Facts and figures regarding Eurojust and implementation of the Eurojust decision

On the work of Eurojust

Registered cases

In 2006, 771 cases were registered, which represents an increase of 31% compared to 2005.

In 2007 (between 1 January and 26 September) 789 cases were registered (same period in 2006: 536 cases registered). Eurojust aims for a total of 1000 cases to be registered in 2007, which would represent an increase of 29% compared to 2006.

Most involved countries
Most requesting countries: UK, DE, FR, NL, CZ, SE.

Most requested countries: ES, UK, NL, IT, DE, FR, BE, PL.

Main crime types

Crimes against property, money laundering, drugs trafficking, fraud and trafficking in human beings.

On the implementation of the Eurojust Decision

Formal implementation in national legislation
10 MS have formally implemented the Decision in national legislation.

5 MS have are in the process of formally implementing the Decision

Status of national member

19 national members have the status of public prosecutor,
7 have the status of public prosecutor/judge
1 has the status of public prosecutor/police officer

Duration of mandate
11 MS have granted their national member a mandate of 3 years
3 national members have a mandate of less than 3 years
7 national members have a mandate of more than 3 years
19 MS have the possibility to renew the mandate
6 national members have a mandate for an indefinite period of time

Powers granted to the national members

All national members can:

- ask their home state to initiate investigations or prosecutions related to a specific fact;

- setting up a coordination meeting

- ask their MS to provide them with all information necessary to carry out its tasks
3 MS can/will accept a decision of Eurojust regarding a conflict of jurisdiction
22 national members may ask for the setting up of a Joint Investigation Team or may participate in a JIT
17 national members have direct access to the criminal records
25 national members may direct contact competent national authorities
15 national members maintain the powers that they had when practicing as a prosecutor/judge before getting appointed as national member
8 national members have the competence to decide on the execution of the request for judicial cooperation
8 national members may initiate criminal investigations and prosecutions
4 national members may conclude a Joint Investigation Team

To know which MS have granted such powers, please see tables in Communication.

Source: European Commission