The Government granted its approval on 8 June for the exercise of the option to adopt a proposed Council decision on the exchange of information and co-operation concerning terrorist offences. It also authorised the proposal of appropriate motions in both Houses of the Oireachtas seeking approval for the exercise of this option or discretion as provided for in Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take part in the decision. The decision in question was proposed by the European Commission in response to Objective 3 of the European Union's action plan against terrorism. It aims to improve efficiency in the exchange of information on terrorist offences between member states and Europol and Eurojust.
The Attorney General has advised me that one particular aspect of the proposed Council decision, on which I will elaborate more fully, may require legislation to enable full implementation. The motions, therefore, seek the approval of both Houses for the exercise of the option.
It might be of assistance to members of the committee if I briefly outline the background to the proposed measure. In the wake of the terrorist attacks in Madrid on 11 March 2004, the European Union, under Ireland's Presidency, determined that combating terrorism and the threat of terrorism required improved co-ordination. The European Council declaration of 25 March 2004 sets out seven strategic objectives for the action plan against terrorism. Objective 3 of the plan was to maximise the capacity of EU bodies and member states to detect, investigate and prosecute terrorists and prevent terrorist attacks. On 29 March 2004, under Objective 3, the Commission proposed a draft Council decision on the exchange of information and co-operation concerning terrorist offences.
The purpose of the proposed decision is to provide for improved co-ordination and co-operation between EU institutions and services responsible in this area. It builds on another earlier EU measure aimed at combating terrorism which provided for information exchange on persons, groups and entities listed in the annexe to Common Position 2001/931/CFSP which provides for the freezing of funds of those listed. As such, the earlier measure was limited to information exchange on persons, groups and entities already identified in another EU instrument.
The proposed Council decision will repeal the earlier measure and extend the scope of information exchange to include the exchange of information on all terrorist offences, not merely those listed in an annexe to the earlier decision. It provides that each member state will exchange information with Europol and Eurojust on all stages of criminal proceedings relating to terrorist offences.
Turning to the contents of the proposed Council decision, the principal operative provision is Article 2 which provides for the establishment of a designated specialised service within the police services in each member state which will have access to all relevant information on criminal investigations with respect to terrorist offences. This information is exchanged with Europol. Article 2 also provides for the establishment in each member state of a designated Eurojust national correspondent for terrorism matters. This person will have access to all relevant information on prosecutions and convictions for terrorist offences. This information is exchanged with Eurojust. The Irish national correspondent for terrorism matters is an officer of my Department.
The remaining articles of the proposed decision are concerned with such matters as the definition of terrorist offences which is provided for in the 2005 Act; the type of information which should be exchanged with Europol and Eurojust, including details of the person and acts under investigation, the offences concerned, links with other cases and the penalties imposed and information on enforcement; the use of joint investigation teams in appropriate cases; and urging that requests for assistance in terrorist cases be given priority.
These are the principal points of the proposed Council decision which is relatively short. It is clear that its primary aim is to ensure a better exchange of information with those European bodies with responsibility for investigating and prosecuting terrorist offences.
The provision for the exchange of information with Europol requires no implementing legislation here. The Europol Act 1997 which gave effect to the Europol Convention of 1995 and enabled Ireland to take part in the work of Europol covers the exchange of information. The position on the exchange of information with Eurojust is slightly different. Eurojust was established in 2002 and consists of 25 member states. Its objectives are to stimulate and improve co-ordination between member states in the investigation and prosecution of serious cross-border crime. It also aims to improve co-operation between the competent authorities in member states, in particular by facilitating the execution of requests for mutual legal assistance.
Since its establishment Eurojust has seen a steady increase in the number of cases referred to it by national authorities. The principal types of cases in 2004 included drug trafficking, fraud, money laundering, homicide, terrorism and people trafficking. As part of its efforts to ensure better action against crime, Eurojust has concluded a co-operation agreement with Europol. It continues to develop its capacity to assist the appropriate authorities in member states in the fight against crime, in particular organised cross-border crime and terrorism.
As I mentioned, the Attorney General has advised me that implementing domestic legislation will be necessary to enable the exchange of information with Eurojust. He has also advised me that, as a consequence, motions under Article 29.4.6o of the Constitution are required. The necessary legislative proposals will be prepared and brought before both Houses of the Oireachtas in the normal way in due course. I hope this summary is of assistance to members of the committee.