Code by Fab
Europol
Legend :
1) Main term, skip : + 348 : « Europol »
2) « For among my people are found wicked men : they lay wait, as he that setteth snares ; they set a trap, they catch men...»
3) « West »
4) « Western »
5) « Union kneading hurrying »
6) “In uniting”
7) “Wicked”
8) “Wile”
9) “Whole earth”
10) “Warden”
11) “Wiliness”
12) “666 chamber/nest”
Address : http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l14005b.htm
To improve police cooperation between the Member States to combat terrorism, illicit traffic in drugs and other serious forms of international crime.
Council Act of 26 July 1995 drawing up the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) [Official Journal C 316 of 27.11.1995].
1. This Convention establishes a European Police Office, "Europol", to be located in The Hague, Netherlands. Its task is to improve the effectiveness of the competent authorities in the Member States and cooperation between them in an increasing number of areas.
2. Europol has the following principal tasks:
3. Each Member State establishes or designates a national unit to carry out the tasks listed above. The national unit is the only liaison body between Europol and the competent national authorities. It sends Europol at least one liaison officer who is instructed by the national unit to represent its interests within Europol.
4. To perform its tasks, Europol maintains a computerised information system. Data are directly entered into the system that is directly accessible for consultation by national units, liaison officers, the Director, the Deputy Directors and duly empowered Europol officials.
5. The information system may be used to store non-personal data and personal data. The creation of a computerised personal data file by Europol is subject to an instruction approved by the Management Board. Personal data retrieved from the information system can only be transmitted or used by the competent services of the Member States to prevent and combat crime coming under the competence of Europol, and other serious criminal offences.
6. Any individual wishing to obtain data relating to him stored within Europol may make a request free of charge to the national competent authority in any Member States he wishes, and that authority informs him that Europol will reply direct. Everybody has the right to request Europol to correct or delete any incorrect data concerning them.
7. An independent joint supervisory body is responsible for monitoring the activities of Europol to ensure that the rights of the individual are not violated by the storage, processing and utilisation of the data held by Europol.
8. The organs of Europol are:
9. The budget is financed by contributions from the Member States and other occasional receipts. The accounts in respect of all income and expenditure entered in the budget together with the balance sheet showing Europol's assets and liabilities are subject to an annual audit. The audit is carried out by a joint audit committee, made up of three members appointed by the Court of Auditors of the European Communities.
10. Each Member State is liable for any damage caused to an individual as a result of legal or factual errors in data stored or processed within Europol. Only the Member State in which the event which gave rise to the damage occurred may be the subject of an action for compensation by the injured party.
11. Following the entry into force of the Convention, measures were taken to enable the European Police Office to be established. The measures relate to the rights and obligations of the liaison officers, the rules applying to files, the rules of procedure of the joint supervisory body, the staff regulations, the rules on confidentiality, the financial regulation, the headquarters agreement, the protocol on privileges and immunities and the agreements on the rights and immunities of the liaison officers. Thus, Europol was able to begin operating on 1 July 1999, replacing the Europol Drugs Unit ( EDU ) set up on a temporary basis in 1995.
12. The Convention is open to accession by any State that becomes a member of the European Union.
Council Act 97/C 221/01 [Official
Journal C 221 of 19.07.1997]
Council Act of 19 June 1997 drawing up, on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty
on European Union and Article 41 (3) of the Europol Convention, the Protocol
on the privileges and immunities of Europol, the members of its organs, the
Deputy Directors and employees of Europol.
Council Act 99/C 26/01 [Official
Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Act of 3 November 1998 adopting rules applicable to Europol analysis
files.
Council Act 99/C 26/02 [Official
Journal C26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Act of 3 November 1998 adopting rules on the confidentiality of
Europol information.
Council Act 99/C 26/03 [Official
Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Act of 3 November 1998 laying down rules concerning the receipt
of information by Europol from third parties.
Council Act 99/C 26/04 [Official
Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Act of 3 November 1998 laying down rules governing Europol's external
relations with third States and non-European Union related bodies.
Council Decision 99/C 26/05
[Official Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Decision of 3 December 1998 supplementing the definition of the
form of crime 'traffic in human beings' in the Annex to the Europol Convention.
Council Decision 99/C 26/06
[Official Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Decision of 3 December 1998 instructing Europol to deal with crimes
committed or likely to be committed in the course of terrorist activities against
life, limb, personal freedom or property.
Council Act 99/C 26/07 [Official
Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Council Act of 3 December 1998 laying down the staff regulations applicable
to Europol employees.
Amended by the following Decisions:
Council Decision 99/C 364/02 [Official Journal C 364 of 17.12.1999]
Council Decision of 2 December 1999 laying down the staff regulations applicable
to Europol employees, with regard to the establishment of remuneration, pensions
and other financial entitlements in euros;
Council Decision C5-0089/1999 [Official Journal C 107
of 13.04.2000]
Council Decision amending the Council Act of 3 December 1998 laying down
the staff regulations applicable to Europol employees, with regard to the establishment
of remunerations, pensions and other financial entitlements in euros.
Act of the Management Board
of Europol 99/C 26/08 [Official Journal C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Act of the Management Board of Europol of 1 October 1998 laying down its
rules of procedure.
Act of the Management Board of Europol 99/C 26/09 [Official Journal
C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Act of the Management Board of Europol of 15 October 1998 concerning the
rights and obligations of liaison officers.
Act of the Management Board of Europol 99/C 26/10 [Official Journal
C 26 of 30.01.1999]
Act of the Management Board of Europol of 15 October 1998 laying down the
rules governing Europol's external relations with European Union-related bodies.
Council Act 99/C 25/01 [Official
Journal C 25 of 30.01.1999]
Council Act of 18 January 1999 adopting the Financial Regulation applicable
to the budget of Europol.
Repealed by Council Act 99/C 312/01 [Official Journal C 312 of 29.10.1999]
Council Act of 4 October 1999 adopting the Financial Regulation applicable
to the budget of Europol.
Council Act 99/C 88/01 [Official
Journal C 88 of 30.03.1999]
Council Act of 12 March 1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission
of personal data by Europol to third States and third bodies.
Act of the joint Supervisory
Body of Europol 99/C 149/01 [Official Journal C 149 of 28.05.1999]
Act No 1/99 of the joint Supervisory Body of Europol of 22 April 1999 laying
down its rules of procedure.
Decision 99/C 149/02 [Official
Journal C 149 of 28.05.1999]
Council Decision of 29 April 1999 extending Europol's mandate to deal with
forgery of money and means of payment. Corrigendum published in Official
Journal C 229, 12.08.1999
Council Act 99/C 149/03 [Official
Journal C 149 of 28.05.1999]
Council Act of 29 April 1999 appointing the Director and Deputy Directors
of Europol.
Communication 99/C 185/01
[Official Journal C 185 of 1.07.1999]
Communication concerning the taking up of activities of Europol.
Decision 99/C 364/01 [Official
Journal C 364 of 17.12.1999]
Council Decision of 2 December 1999 adjusting the remuneration and allowances
applicable to Europol employees.
Decision 2000/C 106/01 [Official
Journal C 106 of 13.04.2000]
Council Decision of 27 March 2000 authorising the Director of Europol to
enter into negotiations on agreements with third member States and non-EU related
bodies.
Council Declarations [Official
Journal C 106 of 13.04.2000]
Council declaration concerning the relations between Europol and third States
and non-European Union-related bodies.
Council declaration concerning the priority to be given to third States and
non-European Union-related bodies.
Council Decision C5-0090/1999
[Official Journal C 107 of 13.04.2000]
Council Decision adjusting the remuneration and allowances applicable to
Europol employees.
Act of the Management Board
of Europol 2001/C65/01 [Official Journal C 65 of 28.02.2001]
Act of the Management Board of Europol of 27 September 1999 laying down the
rules on Europol personnel files.
Decision of the Management
Board of Europol 2001/65/02 [Official Journal C 65 of 28.02.2001]
Decision of the Management Board of Europol of 16 November 1999 agreeing to
the conditions and procedures laid down by Europol regarding taxes applicable
to salaries and emoluments paid to Europol staff members for the benefit of
Europol.
Decision of the Director
of Europol 2001/65/03 [Official Journal C 65 of 28.02.2001]
Decision of the Director of Europol of 3 July 2000 adapting the amounts mentioned
in the Europol Staff Regulations to the euro.
Decision of the Director
of Europol 2001/65/04 [Official Journal C 65 of 28.02.2001]
Decision of the Director of Europol of 3 July 2000 adapting to the euro the
amounts mentioned in the Annex to the Decision of the Management Board of Europol
of 16 November 1999 with respect to taxes and the salary adjustment decided
by the Council.
Annex to the Rules on the confidentiality of Europol information [Official Journal C 086 of 16.03.2001].
Council Act of 15 March 2001
amending the Staff Regulations applicable to Europol employees.
Council Decision of 15 March 2001 adjusting the basic salaries and allowances
applicable to Europol staff [Official Journal C 112 of 12.04.2001].
Council act of 28 November 2002 drawing up a Protocol amending the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) and the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of Europol, the members of its organs, the deputy directors and the employees of Europol [Official Journal C 312 of 16.12.2002].
On 23 July 1996 the Council
adopted an act drawing up, on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on
European Union, the Protocol on the interpretation, by way of preliminary rulings,
by the Court of Justice of the European Communities of the Convention on the
establishment of a European Police Office [Official Journal C 299 of 09.10.1996].
By a declaration made at the time of the signing of the Protocol, or even afterwards,
Member States may accept the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice to give preliminary
rulings on the interpretation of the Convention.
In their declaration Member States may specify that either:
On 29 April 1999, the Council adopted
a decision extending Europol's mandate to deal with forgery of money and means
of payment [Official Journal C 149 of 28.05.1999].
The decision states that the terms "forgery of money" and "forgery
of means of payment" will mean the acts defined in Article 3 of the Geneva
Convention of 20 April 1929 on the Suppression of counterfeiting currency, which
applies to both cash and other means of payment.
Europol's mandate will extend to these offences from the date it starts activities.
On 30 November 2000, the Council
adopted an act drawing up, on the basis of Article 43(1) of the Convention on
the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), a Protocol
amending Article 2 and the Annex to that Convention [Official Journal C 358
of 13.12.2000].
This Act extends Europol's powers to money laundering in general, regardless
of the type of offence from which the laundered proceeds originate.
On 17 October 2000, the Council adopted a Decision on the establishment of a Secretariat for the Joint Supervisory Data Protection Bodies set up by the Convention on the Establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), the Convention on the Use of Information Technology for Customs Purposes and the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement on the gradual abolition of checks at the common borders (Schengen Convention) [2000/641/JAI - Official Journal L 271 of 24.10.2000].
On 30 November 2000, the Council adopted a recommendation to Member States in respect of Europol's assistance to joint investigative teams set up by the Member States. In this document, the Council describes how Europol can assist joint investigative teams and recommends that the Member States make full use of these possibilities.
Address : http://www.statewatch.org/news/2002/feb/01eufbi.htm
Statewatch press release, for release on: 7 February 2002
The activities and development of Europol -
towards an unaccountable FBI in Europe (pdf
version)
EU governments signed the Europol
Convention in July 1995. Four months later, Statewatch published the first publicly
available draft of the text together with a detailed analysis to encourage open
debate on the issues it raised. Six years later, this Convention is being rewritten
to give Europol operational powers and a much wider remit and open debate needs
as much encouragement as ever. A new report from Statewatch by Ben Hayes examines
the key developments and critical issues - to
order a copy
Key issues
* Under the Convention Europol was set up to act as both a ‘clearing house’
for bilateral and multilateral exchanges of data and as curator and custodian
of a central EU intelligence database on organised crime, and when it was agreed
every opportunity was taken to stress this non-operational constitution. But
by next year, Europol officers will be participating in joint investigation
teams operating in two or more EU member states.
* It is clear that Europol has operated, since its creation as the Europol Drugs
Unit in 1993, within the widest possible interpretation of its legal basis and
that restrictions have probably been disregarded at times. This is because of
ambiguity in the original agreement, minimal supervision of its implementation
and a lack of independent scrutiny and management. Europol’s development has
been tarnished by several alleged incidents of corruption.
* The member states have increased Europol’s budget year-on-year since 1994,
and from an initial staff of 18, 260 posts will be funded in 2002, with at least
another 60 liaison officers seconded from the member states.
* Some 17 forms of crime have been added to Europol’s competence, replacing
the original “crime related approach” with a broad, proactive and unregulated
mandate.
* Europol has extensive powers to collect and store information on individuals
and categories of people but the data protection regime may fail to guarantee
the enforcement of established human rights and privacy laws. In amending the
Convention, these rules may be weakened further.
* The Council of the European Union has begun approving a series of cooperation
agreements that will allow another 23 non-EU states and agencies to exchange
data with Europol. Its relationship with other existing and planned EU law enforcement
offices and databases will effectively extend its powers further.
* Fostering EU-wide cooperation in organised crime investigations was the rationale
behind Europol, but while its role is being expanded, it appears that some national
police forces appear reluctant to accept their obligation to share intelligence
and may prefer to cooperate bilaterally on a case-by-case basis.
* In May 2001, the Swedish Presidency of the EU acknowledged “murmurs of discontent”
over the democratic control of Europol, all of which stemmed from the weak provisions
in the original Convention. However, the European Parliament remains on the
margins of the decision-making process and the Council has proposed that future
amendments of the Europol Convention should no longer require ratification by
the 15 national parliaments. Revisions will simply be implemented after unanimous
agreement in the EU Council of Ministers.
* In December, the Belgian presidency proposed a wider competence for the European
Court of Justice over the interpretation and implementation of the Europol Convention.
However, Europol will continue to enjoy far-reaching immunities from the legal
process and is not subject to various regulatory controls on policing usually
found at the national level.
Ben Hayes of Statewatch comments:
“The vast extension of Europol’s mandate, the framework for joint investigation
teams and the EU Convention on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters provides
a logical and practical basis for the development of an informal and unaccountable
“EU-FBI”.
Few people should need reminding that all law enforcement agencies, even those
in their infancy, must be democratically controlled and fully accountable to
the courts”.
For further information please contact: Ben Hayes: (00 44) (0)208 802
1882
The activities and development of Europol - towards an unaccountable “FBI” in
Europe: covers history and development; operational activities and powers; mandate
and competence; approaches to specific forms of crime; problems at Europol;
relationship with other EU agencies; management, judicial control and democratic
accountability; the decision-making process; the Europol “acquis” of texts adopted;
budgets and staff; proposed amendments to the Convention.
A Statewatch publication, 32 pages, A4, charts, diagrams and notes
£10.00 per copy ISBN 1 874481 18 0
Available from: Statewatch, PO Box 1516, London N16 0EW, UK
NOTE TO EDITORS
Press review copies are available, please send fax (00 44 208 880 1727) or an
e-mail: office@statewatch.org. Review copies will be mailed. The publication
is also available as a Word 97 file which can be sent by e-mail - please state
if you would like an e-mail file.
Address : http://www.statewatch.org/news/2002/mar/15europol.htm
Europol to be given access to the S.I.S., then custody ?
- Europol to be allowed to amend and add to records on the Schengen Information
System
EU working parties are to begin making
preparations to give Europol access to the Schengen Information System (SIS).
Both legal changes and technical measures are necessary, and work is to begin
immediately. The proposals will not just allow Europol to consult data, but
to add and amend it as well. Under the two-stage EU Presidency proposal, phase
one covers "immediate access to all information" with a "partial
download" facility. Phase two provides for the :
"possibility of updating SIS by adding, deleting and modifying information"
Europol has long wanted access to the SIS and given the failure of several of
their "analysis work files" because of a reluctance of member states
to share their intelligence data, being able to trawl the SIS for information
would give the agency access to extensive EU-wide data. Law enforcement and
administrative agencies' access to the SIS is restricted to certain categories
of data (see below) but it is presumed that Europol will have full access.
Access or custody ?
Allowing Europol to add information
to the SIS would give another operational role to the agency, enabling it to
enter names of suspects in alerts under Article 99 so that they are subject
to "discrete surveillance" and "specific checks"
(including passenger checks).
The further possibility that Europol could also delete and modify information
would effectively make Europol custodian of the database. At present, data can
only be added by authorities in the member states, and only the state which
entered information can amend or delete it (although the supervisory body on
data protection can order its deletion). If the phase-two proposals are implemented,
Europol would be the only law enforcement agency with central executive powers
over data on the SIS (since the member states only have jurisdiction over their
own data). This would raise a number of highly contentious legal issues with
regard to data protection, privacy and civil liberties.
A technical and legal issue, but not a political one ?
In June, 1999, an EU action plan on organised crime (9423/99 CRIMORG 80, 21.6.99) called for Europol to have access to the SIS. Six months later, negotiations on SIS II (see below) had just begun and Germany proposed that Europol should feature in the plans for the new system. The new proposal suggests that political agreement was reached in the 1999 action plan and implies that no further debate is necessary. But at the time France objected vehemently, stating that:
"While the possibility of giving Europol access to SIS data has been mentioned, there are currently no plans to give Europol any kind of role within SIS" (5495/00, 19.1.00)
Regardless, the preparation of technical and legal measures is underway. This is an example of how commitments in JHA action plans, which are not subject to parliamentary scrutiny, have far reaching consequences.
Databases to be linked by stealth
Article 6(2) of the 1995 Europol Convention expressly forbids the Europol database to be linked to other law enforcement databases:
"The computerized system of collected information operated by Europol must under no circumstances be linked to other automated processing systems, except for the automated processing systems of the national units."
If Europol is allowed to add data to the SIS, a de facto link between the Europol system and the SIS will be established. Although the two databases are unlikely to be coupled by technical means, centralised access at Europol HQ in the Hague, and the likelihood that Europol officers will enter data from analysis files onto the SIS would have the same effect.
|
|
