We will now deal with a motion to approve the adoption by Ireland of a European Council decision establishing the European Police Office, Europol. The Minister will deliver a short presentation after which there will be a question and answer session.
European Council Decision Establishing the European Police Office: Motion.
I thank the committee for making time available to discuss this motion. The approval of the Houses of the Oireachtas is required before Ireland can agree to the adoption of this instrument at EU level. The need to protect the citizens of the European Union against organised crime led to the decision of the European Council in 1991 to establish the European Police Office, more usually known as Europol. That decision was the catalyst for adoption of the Europol Convention in 1995, which currently provides the legal basis for Europol.
Enactment of the Europol Act 1997 in this jurisdiction paved the way for the ratification by Ireland of the Europol Convention, along with its protocols of 1996 and 1997. Since then, three additional protocols to the convention were adopted, in 2000, 2002 and 2003. These protocols were given effect by the Europol (Amendment) Act 2006.
The objective of Europol is to improve the effectiveness and co-operation of the law enforcement authorities of member states in preventing and combating organised crime and terrorism. Europol supports the law enforcement activities of member states by: facilitating the exchange of information via Europol liaison officers who are appointed by the member states as representatives of their law enforcement agencies; providing operational analysis in support of member states' operations; providing expertise and technical support for investigations and operations carried out within the EU under the supervision and legal responsibility of the member states concerned; and generating strategic reports and crime analysis on the basis of information and intelligence supplied by member states, generated by Europol or gathered from other sources.
On a practical level, Europol has contributed to operational successes within member states in the fight against crime. For example, in 2007, the Garda Síochána was one of several police services involved in the highly successful Operation Koala. This was a Europe-wide operation co-ordinated by Europol which led to the identification of several Irish people suspected of involvement in the purchase of child pornography. Other cases involving Ireland culminated in the arrests of drug traffickers and the tracing of criminal assets of overseas criminals. These are practical examples of Europol's value in tackling crime.
Since the inception of Europol in 1995, a significant number of EU legislative instruments have been adopted in the justice and home affairs area. These instruments have included Council decisions establishing Eurojust, the EU's judicial co-operation unit, and CEPOL, the EU's training institute for law enforcement officers. Council decisions may be changed more easily than conventions. This possibility is particularly relevant for Europol as experience has demonstrated that there is always a need to adapt to changing circumstances, one of the reasons the EU decided to move towards a Council decision in this instance.
Over the years, the European Parliament has indicated its desire to be more closely associated with Europol's work, including the establishment of its budget. Currently, Europol is financed by contributions from members states. These issues have been brought to the forefront of the political debate on the future of Europol and how it functions. This debate was given a particular focus during the Austrian and Finnish Presidencies of the European Union in 2006. It culminated in the adoption of Council conclusions which mandated the competent Council bodies to commence work on the replacement of the Europol Convention by a Council decision establishing Europol.
Following on from the adoption of these Council conclusions, the European Commission, in December 2006, presented a proposal for a Council decision establishing Europol. Discussions on the Commission's proposal commenced in early 2007 and continued until April 2008. On 18 April 2008, the Council of Ministers reached a political agreement on the proposed Council decision establishing Europol.
Under its new legal basis, Europol will continue to engage in its current activities. However, there will be some significant changes to its organisation and functioning. The proposed Council decision, which replaces the Europol Convention, extends the mandate of Europol to all serious cross-border crime. Europol's objective in this regard will be to support and strengthen action by the law enforcement authorities of member states in preventing and combating organised crime, terrorism and other forms of serious crime affecting two or more member states.
The Council decision provides for the financing of Europol from the budget of the European Communities and the application of the European Communities staff regulations to Europol. The text of the decision is divided into chapters. Chapter I relates to the establishment of Europol, its objective and tasks. Europol will continue to participate in a support capacity in joint investigation teams. The detailed arrangements for that participation will be laid down in arrangements with the member states participating in the teams.
There will continue to be a Europol national unit designated in each member state. The national unit will be the only liaison body between Europol and the national law enforcement authorities. However, as is currently the case, member states may allow direct contact between designated competent authorities and Europol. Each national unit must second at least one liaison officer to Europol. The liaison officers of a member state constitute its national liaison bureau at Europol. They represent the interests of their national unit.
Chapter II relates to information processing systems. To achieve its objectives, Europol processes personal data by automated means or in structured manual files. Europol has established and maintains an information system and, under the Council decision, will continue to do so. The Council decision also provides for Europol's management board to decide on the establishment of a new system for processing personal data. Any such management board decision must be submitted to the Council of Ministers for approval.
Chapter III sets out common provisions on information processing. These include provisions on control of retrievals from any of Europol's automated data files used to process personal data, rules on the use of data and time limits for the storage and deletion of data files.
Chapter IV relates to Europol's relations with its European Union and other partners. Europol will continue to be able to conclude agreements with European Community or European Union bodies. It also will continue to be able to conclude agreements with third states and international organisations. For the first time it also will be able to process information, including personal data, transmitted by private parties and persons under strict conditions. The processing of personal data by Europol necessitates the development of considerable data protection provisions. Chapter V contains a comprehensive range of such provisions. In processing personal data Europol will observe the principles of the relevant Council of Europe convention and recommendation. For the first time its management board will appoint a data protection officer who will act independently in the performance of his or her duties.
The Council decision contains detailed provisions regarding the right of access to and the right to correction and deletion of data. Appeals against a decision of Europol in respect of data may continue to be made to an independent joint supervisory body. Each member state will continue to have to designate a national supervisory body to monitor independently the handling of personal data by that member state.
Chapter VI contains provisions on the organisation of Europol which will continue to have a management board. However, a representative of the Commission will sit on the board alongside the representatives of the member states. Currently, the Commission is invited to attend management board meetings and has non-voting status. The chairperson and deputy chairperson will serve for an 18-month period. As a general rule, management board decisions will be taken by a two thirds majority. Europol will continue to be headed by a director appointed by the Council of Ministers. In making the appointment the Council will act by a qualified majority rather than unanimously as at present.
Chapter VII relates to confidentiality issues. Europol and the member states will continue to be obliged to protect confidential information. The members of the management board, the director and deputy directors, employees of Europol and liaison officers will continue to have obligations of discretion and confidentiality.
Chapter VIII contains the budget provisions. Europol will be financed from the budget of the European Communities rather than from member states' contributions. It will be subject to the relevant budgetary procedures. Consequently, the European Parliament will be involved in the adoption of Europol's budget.
Chapter IX comprises miscellaneous provisions, including rules concerning access to Europol documents, the language regime and the headquarters agreement. The Presidency of the Council, the chairperson of the management board and the director will be obliged to appear before the European Parliament at its request. Chapter X contains the transitional provisions such as those relating to legal succession, the director, deputy directors, staff and budget. Chapter XI comprises the final provisions. It is hoped the proposed Council decision will replace the Europol convention from 1 January 2010. The member states must ensure their national law is in conformity with the Council decision by that date.
Implementation of the Council decision will enable Europol to react with much greater flexibility in a constantly changing environment. There will no longer be a need to establish a link to organised crime to enable it to assist member states. This will enable it, for example, to provide assistance in the search for a person sought for a serious crime such as murder who has fled to another member state. However, it will not have powers of arrest. The primary responsibility for preventing and combating crime will remain with the member states' law enforcement agencies.
Europol will be financed from the budget of the European Communities and this will lead to greater democratic accountability. The European Parliament will have a stronger role through the involvement of the Parliament in considering Europol's budget. In addition, the management board chairperson, as well as the Presidency of the Council and Europol's director, may be asked by the Parliament to inform it of Europol's activities.
Ireland will be obliged to ensure its national law is in conformity with the Council decision which will require new legislation. The necessary legislative proposal will be brought before the Houses of the Oireachtas in due course.
I thank members for their co-operation in making time available. The Government hopes to be in a position to signify full agreement to the text of the Council decision when submitted to the EU Council of Ministers for formal adoption. In that regard, it would like to be in a position to inform, as soon as possible, the secretariat of the Council of the European Union that Ireland's parliamentary reservation has been lifted. In such circumstances, I ask the committee to approve the motions before it.
I thank the Minister for this information and coming before the joint committee to deal with queries on this most important issue.
I welcome the progress made recently by European states and the European Union towards ensuring cross-border organised crime can be dealt with in a co-ordinated and constructive manner. I have some questions and will be as brief as possible. I note the approval of these motions will require stand-alone legislation in Ireland. I suggest such approval could be sought in a miscellaneous provisions Bill to be taken this year. Alternatively, will it necessitate a Europol amendment Bill?
While Ireland will have engaged in the enactment of legislation and its commitment to dealing with transnational crime is well known and acknowledged, will the Minister inform members of the position of other EU member states? I refer, in particular, to the newer member states, that is, the Baltic states and the former Soviet bloc states. Are they as advanced as Ireland in this regard? Have they signed up to the appropriate motions and have they enacted legislation? I make this point because of the importance of ensuring the European Union can act, with particular reference to crime of an east European nature and organised Mafia crime in the former Soviet Union. As I envisage an important role for Europol in that regard, how advanced are the other states in equipping themselves with the type of information and approach that Ireland possesses and has adopted?
I am pleased that Europol will not, at least for the present, have powers of arrest. It is important to ring-fence such powers within our national jurisdiction and legislation. However, while Europol will not have powers of arrest in Ireland, obviously it will engage in practices such as sitting in on interviews, asking questions and probing. The Minister should take members through the changes envisaged by the implementation of this new Council decision in this regard. Will, for example, members of Europol acting in this jurisdiction be identified by a form of insignia? While I assume such members will not exhibit a uniform or anything like it, will there be a process, whereby their membership of the organisation will be identified? On the assumption that the practice of Europol members sitting in on interviews will be important, does the Minister envisage that they will have observer status or will they act as prosecutors, questioners and probers in their own right? Moreover, is it envisaged that the Europol national unit in this jurisdiction will be on a permanent or an operation by operation basis? Not having been a Member of the Oireachtas for a number of years, I am not overly familiar with the current position on the siting of offices in national jurisdictions in locations such as Dublin. Is there permanent representation or does it operate on a case by case basis? Does the Government intend to have the legislation enacted this year?
The legislation must be passed by 1 January 2010 in all member states and the Government will act to ensure that is the case. All member states have given a political commitment to have it in place by 2010. Only two or three countries, including Ireland, had a parliamentary reservation. We had it because, under our Constitution, our procedure is to put something through Parliament. While I am unsure of each member state's position, I would hazard a guess that each has given a commitment to see this done. I agree on the point regarding new member states, but they have all committed to this in the political decision from which it flows.
We have not participated in any joint investigation teams yet. Obviously, the composition of the teams and Europol's involvement would be subject to agreement. Europol would not have the power of arrest or other normal powers of the Garda or other police enforcement agencies. Those powers will continue to reside with member states. However, Europol will assist in the general investigation of a specific item set up by a joint investigation team on an operation-by-operation basis rather than under a permanent structure.
The designated national unit is in the liaison and protection section of Garda headquarters in Dublin. Two gardaí and one customs officer are permanently attached to our Europol national unit. We have also two detective sergeants working as Europol liaison officers at the Irish liaison unit in the Hague. In addition, we have a customs officer who took up a position as a Europol liaison officer in the Hague on 1 August 2008. Other than these officers, 11 Irish civilians work in a number of areas in Europol including finance, procurement and the secretariat of the heads of Europol's national units.
The types of offences are listed in the annex to the Council decision. Heretofore, they related to terrorism, drugs and organised crime. In accordance with Article 4.1, the range of offences under which Europol can be part of an investigation has been broadened significantly.
I welcome the Minister and the thrust of the decision. It is important, especially for victims of crime, that Europol's role be strengthened to give it a function in all serious cross-border crime rather than just organised crime. The example of a murder suspect leaving the jurisdiction for another EU jurisdiction is important.
The decision makes substantive changes to Europol. It is necessary to note the increased role of the European Parliament. While this is welcome, it is unfortunate that, given the substantial changes in Europol's roles and powers, the parliamentary role has not been extended further. For example, the Council of Ministers is still the body that appoints the director of Europol. The processing of personal data is a major extension of power, but the new system will be subject to the Council of Ministers' decision rather than to the European Parliament. Will the Minister tell the committee whether Ireland, at the level of the Council of Ministers, will ensure adequate safeguards on the protection of personal data? We cannot expect European parliamentary scrutiny. In general, I welcome Europol's assumption of this role, but we must be careful in the protection of civil liberties. I am glad that legislation will be before the Houses in this respect.
We will be able to include in legislation the conditions under which we will participate, including the insistence that the Garda continues to be our law enforcement agency and that Europol will not have an entitlement to powers of arrest, charge and so on.
An increase in the involvement of the European Parliament is subject to political agreement among member states. It is really a financial and oversight question in that the European Parliament can call the various heads of Europol before it to be informed of and to discuss Europol's activities. In budgetary terms, the European Parliament has an entitlement to intervene. Currently, the Irish contribution to Europol is approximately €600,000, which will transfer to the Commission as a result of this decision.
The safeguards on information processing are laid down in Articles 29 and 30. Each member state must designate a supervisory body to monitor independently the input, retrieval and communication to Europol of personal data. This is a standard provision and is subject to data protection legislation. The data protection officer, which is a new position, will be independent in his or her functions.
The extension of the types of crime that can be investigated flows from Europol's experience to date. Ireland has not yet participated in a joint investigation team, but we have participated in a number of significant operations, including that into the child sex offenders network. The case was initiated in Ukraine and Italy and we became involved. In 2008, there was significant Europol involvement in supporting the arrest of 99 people in Spain and 20 in other member states. That international organised group of criminals was involved in the skimming of credit cards at ATMs. The data was used to produce counterfeit payment cards for illegal cash withdrawals from ATMs in Spain and other member states. The investigation is ongoing and criminal profits of more than €6 million have been discovered. This clearly indicates why Europol is necessary — crime is becoming more cross-border than ever before, particularly with the advent of new technologies such as the Internet, etc.
I welcome the Minister. That Europol is to be placed on a firmer footing is good.
I wish to ask a number of simple questions on how crime has become sophisticated. The Minister's reference to Spain is an example of cross-border crime. If Europol does not have power to arrest, how will it work? If someone commits a murder in Ireland and lives in northern Italy, will police in Italy deal with the case and will the person be arrested there and extradited? What is the envisaged structure?
How will the chairperson and deputy chairperson be selected from the management board, who will select them and what will their grades be? Is the Garda's PULSE system compatible with the information systems to be used across Europe? How will we share data?
The more technology the Garda has, the better. From an IT point of view the Garda Síochána has the benefit of the PULSE system, which is working extremely well nationally. It feeds into the Europol system, which is designed to allow information to be analysed and shared. It is an operation that, particularly from the point of view of a small country such as Ireland, indicates if there are implications relating to crime involving another part of the EU.
The force does not have powers of arrest such as the Deputy suggested. If someone committed a murder in Italy it would be members of the Italian law enforcement agency who would make the arrest. In the event of cross-border investigations and trends in respect of that type of crime and the significance it had for other member states, information would be shared. The analysing and sharing of information can give member states a broader understanding of how crime is progressing. Regarding joint investigation teams, Europol has a significant input in advising and sharing information gleaned from various sources.
My other question was on how the chairperson and deputy chair will be selected. It is referred to in chapter 6, concerning the management board.
They are selected by the Council of Ministers for 18 months. I am not aware of the exact procedure, which is subject to negotiation.
I thank the Minister for his presentation on this draft EU Council decision. I take his point on Europol being more flexible based on a Council decision rather than on a convention and his point on the extension of its mandate. My first question, on the liaison officers, was answered.
Regarding the time limits for the storage and deletion of files, what are the time limits and when is it envisaged that a data protection officer will be appointed? Another issue is the types of crime that Interpol focusses on. Does it focus on human trafficking and to what extent has it had success? Is the emphasis on drugs, financial crime and paedophilia? There is concern about human trafficking nowadays.
Human trafficking is among the top three issues, with drug trafficking and money laundering. Human trafficking, because of its ever increasing occurrence, is close to the top of the agenda. The data protection officer must be appointed by 1 January 2010. Regarding the retention of information, it is generally held for three years, with some exceptions, subject to review.