opinion
CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN REFORM
Can the EU achieve an area of freedom, security and justice? By Adam Townsend In 1997 the EU member-states committed themselves to constructing an ‘area of freedom, security and justice’ – a task at least as ambitious as the creation of the single market. To guarantee freedom and justice while enhancing security, member-states will have to co-ordinate their justice and home affairs (JHA) policies, and in some areas grant the EU wideranging new powers. These include: powers to make national criminal laws more similar; make national police forces and prosecutors work together more effectively; build a common border guard; develop common asylum and visa policies; make the EU courts more efficient; and guarantee the rights of individuals. However, the EU has found it difficult to develop effective JHA policies in these areas for a number of reasons. Member-states must agree unanimously to take most decisions, which makes policy-making painstakingly slow. Moreover, the EU treaties have a confusing legal structure which spreads JHA policies across all three of the Union’s pillars, and applies different procedures to policy-making in each pillar. In 2001 European heads of government decided to establish a ‘Convention on the Future of Europe’ to prepare a single draft constitutional treaty to replace the patchwork of treaties that set out the way the EU is run. Convention members had a prime opportunity to equip the EU with the tools needed to build the promised area of freedom, security and justice.
states are now debating the treaty and preparing a final version in an intergovernmental conference (IGC) that started in October. Governments may try to make large-scale changes to the draft treaty in the IGC. Whether they do or not, the new constitutional treaty will become the EU’s most important document, codifying what the Union can and cannot do. The new draft constitutional treaty strengthens the EU’s role in justice and home affairs, but it does not make the major changes that would be necessary to achieve the EU’s overall goal for an area of freedom, security and justice. On the positive side, the draft treaty would: ★ allow the Union to apply only one procedure when it makes JHA laws and policies – which should make policy-making faster and more coherent;
require the EU’s Council of Ministers to use qualified majority voting rather than unanimity when voting on most JHA legislation – which should help to speed up decision-making;
★
expand the role of the European Parliament in JHA law-making, which will enhance democratic scrutiny of JHA decisions; ★
★ strengthen the legal impact of EU legislation in member-states by giving more laws direct effect; ★ extend
The Convention completed its draft of the constitutional treaty in July 2003. EU member-
the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice to cover JHA, which would strengthen the rule of law at EU level;