INTRODUCTION

If the European Union is to win the maximum support of its citizens, it must show that it can deliver concrete results on issues that really matter. The Convention will be deemed to be a success if it is seen to have put in place means to ensure that freedom can be enjoyed in conditions of security and justice is accessible to all. People have the right to expect the Union to address the threat to their freedom and legal rights posed by terrorism and serious crime. The battle against crime is an area in which the European Union can demonstrate its relevance to its citizens in the most visible way.
There are a number of areas such as cross-border crime, asylum policy or control of the Union’s external borders which cannot be dealt with effectively by States acting on their own, nor is defence against the new terrorism threats compatible with autonomous action at national level.
Public concern has considerably heightened following the events of 11 September 2001 and the emergence of more recent threats arising from international terrorism.

Since the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty, the establishment of a coherent area of freedom, security and justice has formed one of the key objectives of the European Union, spelt out in an ambitious political agenda set by the European Council of Tampere of 1999 and further developed in the Treaty of Nice (notably by the inclusion of Eurojust) which is about to enter into force. In this context, it is important to make clear that the three components - freedom, security and justice - go hand-in-hand and are of equal importance. This principle should guide the Union policy in this area.

This policy should be rooted in a shared commitment to freedom based on human rights, democratic institutions and rule of law. The activities of the Council of Europe in this context are particularly relevant. Indeed, it is important that the citizens feel that a proper sense of "European public order" ("ordre public européen") has taken shape and is actually visible today in their daily lives. In this respect, the principles of transparency and democratic control are of utmost importance. The establishment of a European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice is also closely linked with respect of the rights of citizens and the principle of non-discrimination (Articles 12 and 13 TEC).

On the basis of the Working group's mandate - which was developed in the annotated mandate nine meetings were held and a number of experts were heard 2 . The deliberations have shown a considerable consensus on many issues. On others the Group still have different views and this is reflected in the report. The latter focuses though mainly on the common positions which have emerged within the Group.

These have developed on the basis of two following proposed "golden rules", which were broadly accepted by the Working group:

A common general legal framework recognising the particularities of this area

The Working Group considers that the current "Third pillar" provisions should be brought under a common general legal framework. This would overcome the pillar structure and its well-known adverse effects (uncertainty about legal bases; necessity of two instruments or separate international agreements for a series of initiatives addressing the same problem). All the provisions concerning the European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice could thus be brought together under a single title of the Treaty.

But having a single legal and institutional framework does not mean that the Union procedures would necessarily need to be applied in an identical way: the procedures could vary according to the action envisaged at Union level. The proposals made in this report would combine elements of the Community method with mechanisms allowing in some cases for reinforced co-ordination of operational collaboration at Union level, and the involvement of national parliaments, in order to take into account the specific features of the area of police and criminal law.

In addition, one could envisage that, in line with the example of the Tampere European Council, a multi-annual strategic programme might be set by the European Council (or the Council at the level of Heads of State or Government) following consultation of the European Parliament and national parliaments, defining an overall framework for the Union's action in relation to legislation and operational collaboration.

Introduce, as much as possible, a separation between "legislative" and "operational" tasks

There should be clearer distinction between legislation (legal instruments; legislative procedures; implementation; in large part to be aligned with the general procedures of Community law) and reinforced co-ordination of operational collaboration at Union level. This distinction has guided the elaboration of the Working Group's final report.

To read the full report see:
http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/02/cv00/00426en2.pdf