• Buro Jansen & Janssen is een onderzoeksburo dat politie, justitie, inlichtingendiensten, de overheid in Nederland en Europa kritisch volgt. Een grond-rechten kollektief dat al 30 jaar publiceert over uitbreiding van repressieve wetgeving, publiek-private samenwerking, bevoegdheden, overheids-optreden en andere staatsaangelegenheden.
    Buro Jansen & Janssen Postbus 10591, 1001EN Amsterdam, 020-6123202, 06-34339533, signal +31684065516, info@burojansen.nl (pgp)
    Steun Buro Jansen & Janssen. Word donateur, NL43 ASNB 0856 9868 52 of NL56 INGB 0000 6039 04 ten name van Stichting Res Publica, Postbus 11556, 1001 GN Amsterdam.
  • Publicaties

  • Europa

  • Politieklachten

  • Response of the Irish delegation to 13370/99 EUROPOL 48

    EXTRACTED TEXT FROM:

    COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

    8 February 2000

    5845/00

    LIMITE

    EUROPOL 1

    NOTE from General Secretariat to Europol Working Party

    No. prev. doc.:  13370/99 EUROPOL 48

    Subject :  Comments by delegations to the “First reflections concerning the Tampere Conclusions as far as they relate to Europol” as contained in doc. 13370/99 EUROPOL 48

    ANNEX III

    RESPONSE BY THE IRISH DELEGATION

    Recommendations 43 – Joint Investigation Teams

    While Ireland has no difficulty with the concept of Joint Investigation teams, this is on the basis that the primacy of the Irish police (the Garda Síochána) will not be affected as regards any investigative or police acts which take place within our jurisdiction. As regards the specific recommendation, in Ireland’s view there are two issues to be addressed:

    (i) We would respectfully suggest that the Article 36 Committee should assign responsibility to a specific working group or groups to progress the Tampere conclusion that joint teams should be set up “as a first step, to combat trafficking in drugs and human beings as well as terrorism”. That group or groups must co-ordinate with the other relevant groups and in particular take account of the work done by the Mutual Assistance Group;

    (ii) The participation of Europol needs to be addressed by the Europol Working Group. As a first step, the availability of analysis support by Europol staff based in the Hague to joint teams should be confirmed.

    As a second step, the possibility of allowing Europol staff to be assigned, at the request of the host or lead country, to support joint teams should be considered. Such Europol support staff would not have any operational powers and would be subject to the direction of the host country. Their role would fall within the remit of the existing Europol Convention.

    Consideration could be given to formalising such arrangements by means of a Council decision under Article 34(2)(c) (or possibly (b) of the Treaty).

    Recommendation 44 – Police Chiefs Task Force

    This issue should be addressed in the first instance by the Article 36 Committee. When the basic framework for such a Task Force is clear, the Europol Working Group should consider how it could interact with Europol.

    Recommendation 45 – (a) Resources; (b) operational data; (c) initiate investigations

    (a) The provision of resources is an ongoing matter. The Europol Working Group does not need to involve itself at this point;

    (b) In the context of (c) below, it may be appropriate for the Council to make a declaratory statement on the receipt of operational data by Europol. We would agree with the view that no legal change is required to allow Europol receive operational data;

    (c) The Council is under an obligation to adopt measures to ask the competent authorities of members to conduct and co-ordinate their investigations in specific cases. Ireland is of the view that measures should be taken without amending the Europol Convention;

    A Council decision might be considered addressing issues such as

    (i) operational data;

    (ii) the circumstances where Europol might make requests and to whom;

    and

    (iii) the need for such requests to be given due consideration and response.

    Recommendation 46 – Eurojust

    Ireland is not in a position to comment until the role and structure of Eurojust is clarified.

    Recommendation 51 – Tracing and seizure of assets

    Europol’s role should be determined by the provisions of the Europol Convention. We do not see any need to consider Europol’s role in the context of Recommendation 51.

    Recommendation 56 – Money Laundering

    Ireland supports the extension of Europol’s competence to money laundering in general and favours amending the Europol Convention accordingly.

    ~~~~~

    Source of this document: SEMDOC database

    Statewatch European Monitoring and Documentation Centre

    e-mail: office@statewatch.org