Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Most forms of international co-operation in criminal matters, such as exchange of police information, the gathering of evidence, the freezing of assets and extradition, have now been regulated to some extent by European Union legislation. However, one classical form of co-operation has been largely immune from the influence of the EU legislators. This is the area of transfer of proceedings. At present, EU member states currently transfer criminal proceedings between themselves using a variety of different legal instruments, rather than a uniform legal framework. However, increasing cross-border crime due to open borders and in cases of moving across Europe has enabled criminals to be easily active across borders. This has subsequently led to more cases where several member states have jurisdiction to prosecute the same case, with Europol reporting that some 5,000 international organised crime groups were under investigation in the EU in 2017.

Most EU states rely on the 1959 European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, but under this agreement, transfers are largely unregulated and subject to national laws. A limited number of international instruments have gone a step further to allow a receiving state to assume jurisdiction upon acceptance of the transfer. It is, therefore, critical that we continue to modernise our justice system to ensure it is prepared to respond to current challenges, particularly in an increasingly border-less Europe. Generally speaking, a transfer should be done in the interests of proper administration of justice, as parallel or multiple prosecutions can be inefficient and ineffective, but also discriminatory to the rights of the individuals concerned.

The introduction of this proposal is, therefore, delivering on the goals set in the EU strategy to tackle organised crime, while helping to prevent duplications of proceedings, and avoiding cases of impunity where surrender under a European arrest warrant is refused.

Any European law that touches on the extent of the jurisdiction of national criminal judges will have far-reaching implications from a legal and practical point of view and must be debated. EU criminal justice is increasingly confronted with situations where several member states have jurisdiction to prosecute the same case. On the grounds of effectively combating transnational crime, and preventing human right infringements and the infringement of the fundamental principle of criminal law, that a person may not be prosecuted or punished twice for the same offence, I welcome this proposed legislation. It will ensure that criminal proceedings are conducted in the member state best-placed to deal with them. This will reduce the level of fragmentation, preventing unnecessary parallel criminal proceedings in different states. This will provide greater legal certainty and eventually increase the number of successfully transferred criminal proceedings.

The problematic lack of clear law on the effect of transfers was acknowledged in the previous year, but drilling down and clarifying the criteria and common rules which apply to transfers will result in increased legal certainty by avoiding different interpretations in the member states. This will, therefore, prevent legal fragmentation, improving the administration of justice in line with the EU’s aim of creating a common European area of freedom, security and justice.

These welcome steps will improve efficiency while guaranteeing a common application of laws across the EU through their entry into force at the same time. Overall, I advocate in favour of this regulation as it will prevent duplication of prosecutions and avoid impunity in cross-border cases. Harmonisation in this area will prove an important step to facilitate the proper administration of justice in the common area of freedom, justice and security that the European Union is set to realise.

See this speech in context