Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-13-Speech-1-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001113.5.1-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Madam President, as Chairman of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs, I rise to present Mrs Karamanou’s report. Mrs Karamanou is sadly unable to be with us tonight, but I feel it appropriate that her report should be debated along with Mr Marinho’s excellent report, which we have just discussed.
The Republic of Portugal presented a draft Protocol amending Article 2 of the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office, Europol. This Portuguese initiative aims to extend Europol’s competences in order to establish a general framework of competence for Europol in relation to money laundering. The fight against money laundering is, of course, one of the Union’s most important priorities, as rightly identified at the Tampere Summit last year. Considering that money laundering is at the heart of organised crime, especially drug trafficking, which represents such a threat to public health and public security, one cannot but endorse this proposed measure. Declarations must be followed by concrete steps to trace, freeze, seize and confiscate the proceeds of crime. This proposed Protocol should be seen as a necessary measure in a European strategy for police cooperation in the field of money laundering. But considering the urgency, our rapporteur seeks in her Amendment No 6 to have this Protocol adopted as quickly as possible that is, according to Article 34(2)(d) of the Treaty on European Union, when a majority of Member States have notified their approvals.
The committee which I have the honour to chair adopted Mrs Karamanou’s report nearly unanimously. Much as we approved of the Portuguese initiative, however, we insist on a broader revision of the Europol Convention and indeed on mechanisms to ensure both democratic accountability and judicial control of Europol. Let me touch briefly on those two matters. On the question of democratic accountability, I note that at the moment Article 39 of the Europol Convention requires that the European Parliament simply be consulted on an annual report. This is quite unacceptable and on several recent occasions, Parliament has requested, in particular in the Nassauer and Cederschiöld reports, modifications to the Europol Convention to ensure true democratic accountability of this agency. In order for Parliament to exercise such democratic control, Europol must, as with the other European institutions such as the ECB and the Ombudsman, report on its activities in an annual exchange of views. The Director of Europol should be required to appear before Parliament’s competent committees when circumstances require. Moreover, Parliament should be represented on the management board of Europol and should have a say in the choice of the director of the agency. These requests are covered in Amendments Nos 2 and 4 of Mrs Karamanou’s report.
On questions of judicial accountability, it seems to us equally unacceptable that possible disputes or conflicts between Member States or between Europol and Member States cannot be brought before the Court of Justice, despite the provisions of Article 35 of the Treaty which refer precisely to matters relating to police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. This contradiction conflicts with democratic values, particularly in regard to human rights, and especially in the field of data protection. This lack of judicial accountability of Europol is particularly dangerous given that Europol seems to be assuming more and more responsibilities and this concern is covered in Mrs Karamanou’s Amendment No 5.
In conclusion, Parliament has considered attentively and positively this Portuguese initiative but we are unsatisfied with the limited scope of the proposed revision of the Europol Convention. Faced with the challenge of internationally organised crime, the European Parliament must be able to represent the citizens of the Union effectively and this is why we must be fully informed of and involved in Europol’s activities, its programmes, effectiveness, methods and means. I am fully aware that in this matter Parliament is only consulted. Nevertheless, we urge the French Presidency, which has shown such a determined commitment to fight against money laundering, to take account of our demands. The creation of a European area of freedom, security and justice cannot remain in the hands of a specialised agency under the sole control of national governments. This is a major area of European integration and the European Parliament is ready to offer its support to policies in this area provided it is duly involved."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples