Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 161: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the details of the case brought before the European Court of Justice seeking to allow Ireland to be part of the EU security arrangements covering bio metric passports and to be part of the EU frontier control system; and the decision and an indication of the approach to be adopted in this regard. [2462/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In the year 2000, Ireland and the United Kingdom were granted the right to participate in some proposals that build upon the Schengen acquis.

In February and May 2004, the United Kingdom signalled its intention to take part in the adoption of Regulation 2007/2004 (EC) on the establishment of FRONTEX, and Regulation 2252/2004 (EC) on biometric passports. Both measures were intended to build on the provisions of Article 62(2) (a) of the Schengen acquis.

The Council subsequently refused to allow the United Kingdom to take part in these measures on the grounds that they constituted a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis to which the United Kingdom was not a party by virtue of Council Decision 2000/365 (EC).

The United Kingdom launched legal challenges through the European Court of Justice with a view to enabling it to participate fully in both regulations. In May 2005, the Government authorised the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to present to the Court Ireland's written observations in relation to these cases. Subsequently Ireland, together with Poland and Slovakia, intervened at the court in support of the United Kingdom. Spain and the Commission were given leave by the Court to intervene in support of the Council.

The Judgements of the European Court of Justice were handed down on 18 December 2007 in which the court ruled that the Council was correct in refusing to allow the United Kingdom the right to take part in adopting the measures in question.

The full implications of these judgements are currently being considered and the Attorney General's legal advice has been sought.