3 Crime prevention
| (25487)
7763/04
COM(04) 165
| Commission Communication: crime prevention in the European Union
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 12 March 2004
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 29 March 2004
|
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | EM of 14 April 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
3.1 Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union provides that;
"The Union's objective shall be to provide citizens with
a high level of safety within an area of freedom, security and
justice by developing common action among the Member States in
the fields of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters
and by preventing and combating racism and xenophobia.
That objective shall be achieved by preventing and
combating crime, organised or otherwise, in particular terrorism,
trafficking in persons and offences against children, illicit
drugs trafficking and illicit arms trafficking, corruption and
fraud…"
3.2 Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union says
that the objectives of the Union shall be achieved "while
respecting the principle of subsidiarity as defined in Article
5 of the Treaty establishing the European Community".
3.3 Article 5 of the EC Treaty provides that:
"In areas which do not fall within its exclusive
competence, the Community shall take action, in accordance with
the principle of subsidiarity, only if and insofar as the objectives
of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the
Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects
of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community".
3.4 Protocol 30 to the EC Treaty sets out conditions
for the application of the principle of subsidiarity. Among other
things, the Protocol says that the following guidelines should
be used in examining whether Community action can be justified:
- the issue has transnational
aspects which cannot be satisfactorily regulated by action by
Member States;
- actions by Member States or lack of Community
action would conflict with the requirements of the Treaty or would
otherwise significantly damage Member States' interest;
- Action at Community level would produce clear
benefits by reason of its scale or effects compared with action
by Member States.
The document
3.5 The Communication is concerned with what the
Commission describes as "volume crime", such as domestic
burglary, theft from vehicles, common assault, street robbery
and anti-social behaviour, such as noisy neighbours and people
who are drunk.
3.6 The Communication says that effective crime prevention
policies can be taken only at the local level, with support at
national level; "Certain cooperation activities need to be
taken at EU level, however, in order to effectively support activities
at national level, to avoid duplication of effort and to use resources
more effectively".[5]
3.7 The Communication recommends that, over the
next few years, Member States and the Commission should focus
on five main areas for priority action:
- define the types of "volume
crime" on which Member States should concentrate their attention.
The Commission regards juvenile, urban and drug-related crime
as categories which are too broad and proposes to subdivide them;
- identify and implement good practice in crime
prevention;
- adopt an agreed methodology for the preparation,
implementation and evaluation of crime prevention projects;
- monitor and evaluate Member States' crime prevention
policies;
- establish consistent definitions and recording
procedures for crime statistics.
3.8 In 2001, the Council adopted a Decision for the
creation of the European Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN).[6]
It contributes to the development of crime prevention at EU level
and supports crime prevention activities at local and national
level. The Commission says that the EUCPN has achieved some good
results but to be fully effective the Network needs its own Community
budget, financial rules for its expenditure and a Secretariat
of adequate size. The EUCPN should either be given its own legal
personality or be incorporated into the Commission's services.
3.9 The Commission also considers that, in the interests
of effective crime prevention throughout the EU, Member States
should incorporate the United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention
of Crime into their national prevention policies. (The UN Guidelines
call, for example, for high-level political commitment, adequate
resources and efficient public-private partnerships.)
3.10 The Commission intends to present by the end
of 2004 proposals to implement the recommendations in the Communication
"in order to achieve quicker and more tangible progress regarding
the prevention of volume crime in the Union".[7]
The Government's view
3.11 The Minister of State at the Home Office (Baroness
Scotland) tells us that:
"The document represents the start of a process
designed to bring about a much-needed strategic and structured
approach to EU cooperation in crime prevention. There are no
immediate policy implications. It sets out the Commission's thoughts
on the future of crime prevention, which has been sent to the
Council for information…
"The Communication has been in gestation for
nine months and consultations included a seminar the Commission
held last June. Some key issues identified then remain untouched,
and the recommendations are either not yet sufficiently detailed
to explore all the policy implications or require modification."
3.12 The Government accepts that the EUCPN needs
a proper institutional base so that it can be resourced properly,
although it is not yet clear what the options presented by the
Commission might entail.
3.13 The Minister tells us that:
"The UK has offered a number of ideas to contribute
to the Commission's thinking and has stressed the need for the
development of national strategies in crime prevention. We have
suggested for consideration the UK model of delivery of crime
prevention/reduction through regional crime directors and statutory
local partnerships, but the Commission have not taken this up
except in terms of underlining the significance of work done at
local level. We would support following internationally agreed
standards but whether the UN crime prevention principles, as suggested
by the Commission, are appropriate needs further exploration".
3.14 Commenting on the Commission's recommendations
for five main areas for priority action, the Minister tells us
that none would be likely to present major problems for the UK,
but that the Government's suggestions have not been adequately
reflected and it will be seeking additions and modifications.
In particular:
- the Government would not support
the proposal to focus on a set of sub-categories of volume crime;
- identification of good practice is desirable,
but an adequate system of "knowledge management" is
essential rather than an inventory;
- it would be impractical and too restrictive to
adopt a single EU method for the preparation, implementation and
evaluation of crime prevention projects — the Government
favours a more flexible approach.
3.15 The Minister says that:
"The Communication complies with the principle
of subsidiarity".
Conclusion
3.16 We recognise that the Communication only
outlines the Commission's thinking and that its formal proposals
will not be presented until the end of this year. We also note
that the Government will be seeking to add to and modify some
of the Commission's recommendations. We shall not, therefore,
comment on the details of the Communication.
3.17 We consider, however, that the Communication
raises a major question that should be addressed straightaway.
The crimes with which the Communication is concerned are essentially
local — theft from vehicles, street robbery, drunkenness
and so on — and, as the Commission says, effective action
to prevent them needs to be taken at local level, with support
at national level. Article 2 of the EU Treaty, read with Article
5 of the EC Treaty, requires the Community to respect the principle
of subsidiarity. Protocol 30 to the EC Treaty specifies guidelines
to be used in examining whether Community action can be justified.
It is not apparent to us that the action the Commission contemplates
on the prevention of "volume crime" is consistent with
those guidelines. We should be grateful, therefore, to know the
reasons for the Minister's view that the proposals do comply with
the principle. We shall keep the Communication under scrutiny
pending her reply.
5 Page 9 of the Communication. Back
6
OJ No. L 153, 8.6.01, p.1. Back
7
Page 16 of the Communication. Back
| 
