Justice and Home Affairs - Case Study Example

Justice and Home Affairs The Council of the European Union, the European Commission, the European Court of Justice and the European Parliament happen to be the most important EU institutions. Citizens of the European Union elect the European Parliament (EP) to represent their interests. It was originated back in the 1950s, and since 1979 its members have been directly elected by the people they represent. Elections take place every five years, and every EU citizen who is registered as a voter can vote. Hence, the Parliament expresses the democratic will of the Union's citizens (more than 455 million people), and it shows their interests in discussions with the other EU institutions. An intergovernmental and supranational union of 25 democratic countries , the European Union was founded under that name in 1992 by the Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty). Nevertheless, several aspects of the Union did exist prior to that date through a series of predecessor relationships, which dates back to 1951. Today, the Union has a common single market, which consist of a customs union, a single currency (the euro) managed by the European Central Bank (adopted by 12 of the 25 member states), a Common Agricultural Policy, a common trade policy, a Common Fisheries Policy, and a Common Foreign and Security Policy. Passport and customs checks were done away with at most of the EU's internal borders, creating a single space of mobility for EU citizens to live, travel, work and invest. Justice ministers and Interior ministers are brought together by the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) and Interior ministers almost once every two months to talk about the development and enforcement of cooperation and common policies in this area. The creation of an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, is a main objective of the EU Treaty. Majority of the things in this field are unanimously decided with a consultation of the European Parliament. However, depending on the matter, some matters are decided by qualified majority, in consultation or in codecision with the European Parliament. Member States started to cooperate in the sphere of Justice and Home Affairs in the mid 1970s on a casual, intergovernmental basis outside the Community framework. In 1990, Germany, France and the Benelux countries signed the Schengen Agreement, which was a major step toward cooperation among the Member States in this area. In the years that followed, many Member States acceded to the Schengen Agreement. The objective of the agreement was to introduce genuine freedom of movement of persons without being controlled at internal borders, while providing for desperate measures in the areas of external border controls, visa policy, police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal affairs. The Treaty on European Union, enforced in November 1993, took a further step by including Justice and Home Affairs in its institutional framework, thus adding a further dimension to the construction of Europe. In May 1999 the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty included the Schengen rules into the institutional framework of the European Union. One of the major aims of the Treaty is to retain and develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice, in which there would be free movement for individuals coupled with appropriate measures relating to the control of external borders, asylum, immigration, as well as the prevention and fight against crime. The Maastricht Treaty on European Union, which was enforced in 1993, came up with a new legal basis for police and judicial cooperation as well as cooperation in home affairs by completing the Community structure with a third pillar. Cooperation encompasses seven areas of common interest: asylum, the crossing of external borders, immigration, fight against drugs and drug addiction, battling international scam, judicial cooperation in civil and criminal affairs and police and customs cooperation. Because these are often extremely sensitive spheres, the treaty places huge importance on the sovereignty of Member States and to the EU institutions that directly involve the Member States. The powers of the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Court of Justice are thus limited. The Treaty of Amsterdam enforced on 1 May 1999, reinvigorated cooperation in the sphere of justice and home affairs by transferring an array of powers to the first pillar (Community). These are visas, asylum, immigration and other policies pertaining to the free movement of individuals. Additionally, judicial cooperation in civil matters now comes under the first pillar of the Treaty on European Union. However, police and judicial coordination in criminal affairs remains a matter for the third pillar. The Treaty of Amsterdam has also incorporated the prevention of racism and xenophobia to the third pillar. The 1999 Tampere European Summit was dedicated to founding an area of freedom, security and justice: • area of freedom: i.e. the implementation of the free movement of persons in accordance with the Schengen acquis, protection of human rights and combating all forms of discrimination; • area of security: i.e. the prevention of crime, particularly combating terrorism, trafficking in human beings, crimes against children, drugs trafficking, arms trafficking, corruption and fraud. Europol has been brought to play a central role in this respect in order to strengthen operational cooperation among Member States; • area of justice: despite the differences between Member States, the Union wishes to ensure efficient and equal access to the legal system for all European citizens by enhancing cooperation between the judicial authorities. Visa, asylum, immigration and other policies relating to the free movement of persons have been a matter for the first pillar of the Treaty on European Union since the Treaty of Amsterdam came into force. The latter lists several objectives with the aim of (partially) harmonising asylum and immigration policy. The Tampere European Council (1999) subsequently established four priorities in these two areas: • Partnership with the countries of origin of many immigrants; • Common asylum procedure; • Proper treatment of legal immigrants; • Management of influx of immigrants and combating illegal immigration. The European Council of the 5 November 2004 has agreed to the use of qualified majority voting (QMV) and co-decision in the fields of asylum, illegal immigration and border control. Before this decision taken by the Council, parliament’s involvement in these matters was ruled by the co-decision procedure. As of 1 April 2005, parliament and the Council will share legislative power in these fields (see above). But legal immigration will remain an exception to this rule, owing to some states’ preference not to delegate sovereignty in this particular field. This passage from unanimity to QMV is projected for 1 April 2005 at the latest by the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe as well as the Nice treaty currently in force. Judicial cooperation in civil matters focuses on enhanced cooperation between the authorities of the Member States. It aims to simplify and improve procedures for the cross-border notification of documents, cooperation in the obtaining of evidence, and the recognition and execution of decisions in civil and commercial matters. It also seeks to favour the compatibility of regulations in terms of conflicts of laws, procedures and the jurisdiction of courts. Since the Treaty of Amsterdam came into force, cooperation in civil matters has also been encompassed within the Union’s first (Community) pillar. (Booker & North, 2003) The Tampere Council set out three specific priorities: • Mutual recognition of judicial decisions; • Improved regulations for compensating the victims of crime; • Greater convergence in the civil law of EU Member States. The objective is to ensure a high level of security and protection for all European Union citizens through cooperation between the diverse EU police forces. The European Police Office (Europol) plays a vital role in this respect. Eurojust, meanwhile, was created to ensure cooperation between the diverse EU public prosecution services. Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters also falls under the third pillar of the Treaty on European Union. All the Member States have in the meantime introduced legislation to combat the same forms of corruption, fraud, drugs trafficking, trafficking in human beings and smuggling. They now have their own legislation to penalise acts of terrorism. Supporters of the European Union argue that the growth of the EU is a force for peace and democracy. They argue that the wars which were a periodic feature of the history of Western Europe have ceased since the formation of the European Economic Community (which later became the EU) in the 1950s. They also claim that in the early 1970s, Greece, Portugal and Spain were all dictatorships, but the desire of the business communities in these three countries to be in the EU created a strong impetus for democracy there. Others argue that peace in Europe since World War II is more due to other causes, such as the need for a unified response to the threat from the Soviet Union, a need for reconstruction after World War II, and a collective temporary tiring of waging war, and that the dictatorships cited came to an end for totally different reasons. In more recent times, the European Union has been extending its influence to the east. It has accepted several new members that were previously behind the Iron Curtain, and has plans to accept several more in the medium-term. It is hoped that in a similar fashion to the entry of Spain, Portugal and Greece in the 1980s, membership for these states will help cement economic and political stability. As the EU continues to enlarge eastward, the candidate countries' accessions tend to grow more controversial. As previously explained, the EU has finished accession talks with Bulgaria and Romania, and set an entry date for the two countries in 2007. However, the rejection of the EU Constitution by France and the Netherlands, and the EU's slow economic growth, have cast some doubt on whether the EU will be ready to accept new members after 2007, when Romania and Bulgaria are set to join EU (in early 2005 they signed the Accession Treaty). A further point of contention for EU members is the accession of Turkey. Accession preliminary talks between Turkey and the EU began in early October 2005. Turkey's Government, led by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has enacted many legal reforms to meet the EU's entry requirements. However, some member states, especially Austria [ Peterson & Shackleton, 2002], repudiate Turkey joining the EU, and the possible economic, immigration and cultural implications that may bring. It is also noted that the vast majority of Turkey's territory lies outside of what is commonly considered the continent of Europe, and many Europeans base their opposition of Turkish membership on the fact that Turkey only holds a small proportion (3%) of its total land area on European soil, albeit that that land area is larger than some existing EU member states. The term European Communities refers collectively to two entities -- the European Economic Community (now called the European Community) and the European Atomic Energy Community (also known as Euratom) -- each founded pursuant to a separate treaty in the 1950s. A third entity, the European Coal and Steel Community, was also part of the European Communities, but ceased to exist in 2003 upon the expiration of its founding treaty. Since 1967, the European Communities have shared common institutions, specifically the Council, the European Parliament, the Commission and the Court of Justice. In 1992, the European Economic Community, which of the three original communities had the broadest scope, was renamed the "European Community" by the Treaty of Maastricht. The European Communities are one of the three pillars of the European Union, being both the most vital pillar and the only one to function in the first place through supranational institutions. The other two "pillars" – Common Foreign and Security Policy, and Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters – are looser intergovernmental groupings. Confusingly, these latter two notions are very much administered by the Community (as they are built up from mere concepts to actual practice). If it is signed, the proposed new Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe would abolish the three-pillar structure and, with it, the distinction between the European Union and the European Community, bringing all the Community's activities under the auspices of the European Union and transferring the Community's legal personality to the Union. There is, however, one qualification: it appears that EURATOM would remain a distinct entity governed by a separate treaty. A basic tension exists within the European Union between intergovernmentalism and supranationalism. Intergovernmentalism is a method of decision-making in international organisations where power is possessed by the member states and decisions are made by unanimity. Independent appointees of the governments or elected representatives have solely advisory or implementational functions. Intergovernmentalism is used by most international organisations today. An alternative method of decision-making in international organisations is supranationalism. In supranationalism power is held by independent appointed officials or by representatives elected by the legislatures or people of the member states. Member state governments still have power, but they must share this power with other actors. Furthermore, decisions are made by majority votes; hence it is possible for a member-state to be forced by the other member-states to implement a decision against its will. There are some elements in European Union politics that are in favour of the intergovernmental approach, whilst others favour the supranational path. Supporters of supranationalism contend that it allows integration to forge at a quicker pace than would otherwise be possible. Where decisions must be made by governments acting unanimously, decisions can take years to make, if they are ever made. Supporters of intergovernmentalism argue that supra-nationalism is a threat to national sovereignty, and to democracy, claiming that only national governments can possess the necessary democratic legitimacy. [The Economist Guide to the European Union, 2005) Intergovernmentalism is being favoured by more Eurosceptic nations such as the United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden; while more integrationist nations such as the Benelux countries, France, Germany, and Italy have tended to prefer the supranational approach. The European Union tries to strike a balance between the two approaches. Nevertheless, this balance is intricate, which ultimately in the often labyrinthine intricacy of its decision-making processes. A convention on the future of Europe that started in March 2002, apart from other things, looked again at this balance and suggested changes. These changes were brought into discussion at an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) in May 2004 and led to the Constitutional Treaty mentioned above. Supranationalism is intimately associated with the inter-governmentalist vs. neofunctionalist debate. This is a discourse regarding why the process of integration has occured at all. Intergovernmentalists contend that the process of EU integration is a consequence of tough bargaining between states. In contrast, neofunctionalism contends that the supranational institutions themselves have been a source of impetus behind integration. Works Cited The Economist Guide to the European Union (2005) (Profile Books) Europe Recast: A History of European Union by Desmond Dinan (Palgrave Macmillan, 2004) John McCormick (Ed). (2002) Understanding the European Union 2nd (Palgrave Macmillan, 2002) John Peterson, Michael Shackleton. (2002) The Institutions of the European Union edited by (Oxford University Press) Neill Nugent. (2002) The Government and Politics of the European Union (Palgrave Macmillan,) John Pinder. (2001) The European Union: A Very Short Introduction. (Oxford) T.R. Reid. (2004) The United States of Europe: The New Superpower and the end of American Supremacy by (Penguin Press) Hugo Young (1998) This Blessed Plot: Britain and Europe from Churchill to Blair (Macmillan) Jeremy, Rifkin. (2004) The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream (Jeremy P. Tarcher) Booker, Christopher and North, Richard. (2003) The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union by (Continuum International Publishing Group - Academi) Read More