17 Promotion of European Union values
| (25066)
14981/03
COM(03) 606
| Commission Communication on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union — respect for and promotion of the values on which the Union is based
|
| Legal base | — |
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 2 March 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 42-iv (2003-04), para 3 (7 January 2004)
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
17.1 The Commission Communication reviews the provisions made
by Article 7(1) and (2) of the EU Treaty relating to the determination
of a "clear risk of a serious breach" of the principles
mentioned in Article 6(1) EU. Article 7 was amended by the Treaty
of Nice and, according to the Commission, "greatly enhanced
the operational character of the means already available under
the Amsterdam Treaty, which allowed only remedial action after
the serious breach had already occurred".
17.2 The Commission argues for the introduction of
"regular monitoring of respect for common values" and
for the development of "independent expertise". To
this end, the Commission has established a pilot project by means
of a contract with the Université Catholique de Louvain.
The project sets up a network of national experts with a main
task of preparing an annual report of the fundamental rights situation
in the Union, giving a precise picture of the situation in each
Member State.
17.3 When we originally considered the Commission
Communication we agreed with the Minister that it may make sense
for the Council to make recommendations under Article 7(1) EU
before the occurrence of serious and persistent breaches of the
kind referred to in Article 7(2) EU, but questioned the need for
the Commission to assume the role of monitoring human rights,
either at all or in the way in which this has been done in the
Commission's pilot project. In particular we asked the Minister
if he shared our doubts about whether the Commission's network
was an appropriate means of securing compliance by Member States
with the principles of Article 7(1) EU. We asked how the Government
propose to ensure that the role of the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR) institutions does not become marginalised. We also
asked the Minister to explain the significance for the Commission
Communication of other conclusions of the Heads of State and Government
of 13 December calling for an extension of the mandate of the
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia so that it
will become a human rights agency.
The Minister's letter
17.4 The Minister for Europe (Mr Denis MacShane)
at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, has now responded to our
request for further information as follows:
"You question the appropriateness of the Commission's
network of human rights experts at Paragraph 3.20. I would point
out that the network was only established in 2002 and is at an
early and informal stage. It is not a means of securing compliance
with the principles in Article 6(1) TEU and is not intended to
be. Indeed, Article 6(1) is not a provision which requires such
a mechanism. The political mechanism for enforcement, as a last
resort, of the principles mentioned in Article 6(1), is Article
7.
"We understand that the Commission sees the
network as a means by which the Commission and the European Parliament
can get helpful background information on fundamental rights.
The Commission, and indeed the EP, have some role in the Article
7 procedure (both have a right of initiative under Article 7(1),
and the Commission does so in respect of Article 7(2)). However,
actual decision making rests with the Council. Very properly,
the Commission acknowledges, in the Communication, that individual
breaches of fundamental rights are a matter for national courts,
the ECJ and ECHR, not the Article 7 procedure.
"At paragraph 3.21 you mention the status of
the Commission's network. The Commission has not yet decided
on how to proceed. However, formalisation of the network (which
currently operates on the basis of a series of short-term contracts)
could take several forms. If it is proposed that the appropriate
legal base is one in the treaties, very careful consideration
would need to be given to the desirability of the base proposed.
"The network was set up in the context of the
proclamation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and is focussed
on that. But the Charter is not co-extensive with the principles
and rights referred to in Article 6(1) and (2). As the Committee
points out, the Charter is not binding and its scope is restricted
to the institutions of the EU and the Member States when they
are implementing Community law.
"It is differently focussed to Article 7, and
while the network's output would no doubt inform the Commission
and EP thinking in relation to Article 7, it would do no more
than that.
"As you point out, the UN, the Council of Europe
and the ECHR are the principal legal mechanisms for monitoring
Human Rights within the EU. The UK will need to make sure that
the Commission's proposal complements rather than duplicates existing
activity and that the Commission makes full use of the information
that is already available from the UN and the Council of Europe.
"We understand that the Commission intends to
launch a consultation phase with NGOs and governments and produce
a 'white paper' in September. We would expect this Communication
to clarify the relationship between the agency and the network
and the work of the EUMC. The Government is also preparing its
own ideas on the development of the Agency and we will advise
the Committee further on the Commission's proposals in due course."
Conclusion
17.5 We thank the Minister for his detailed reply
and are satisfied with his explanations. We note the Government's
view that the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR) are the principal legal mechanisms for monitoring
human rights within the EU, and the Government's intention to
ensure that the Commission's proposal complements rather than
duplicates existing activity, and we infer from this that the
Government will ensure that the role of the ECHR institutions
will not become marginalised by the Commission's network or the
European human rights agency.
17.6 We are content to clear the Communication.
| 
