EUROPEAN POLICE FORCES

Under Franco-German plans, an EU police force would fight against trafficking and control the flow of migrants. First agriculture, then defence, now judicial co-operation - the Franco-German engine has not been lying idle in the past few months. On Wednesday, Paris and Berlin launched a set of proposals for the area of justice and home affairs to be submitted to the Convention on the Future of Europe. Carrying the signatures of the two foreign ministers, Dominque de Villepin and Joschka Fischer, the text reads, according to Le Monde: "The achievement of an area of security, freedom and justice represents, after the internal market and the euro, the next ambitious step in the European project." The paper is in favour of the gradual creation of a European public prosecutor which would have "simple powers of co-ordination" as well as being able to "launch enquiries." Its main powers would be upholding legal protection relevant to community law and the pursuit of certain serious cases of cross-border crime, reports Le Monde. Europol, the European police, should also be given the right to "carry out inquiries" and should become a "central body." Currently Europol does not have any powers and is basically a co-ordinating body. It should be charged, according to the text, with carrying out cross-border police operations in one or more member states. (EUObserver 29.11.2002)

Foreign police will be allowed to operate on British soil for the first time under legislation published yesterday. French or German police and customs teams in "hot pursuit" of a criminal will be allowed to continue their surveillance operations before seeking support from local officers. The arrangements, brought in under the Crime (International Co-operation) Bill, published yesterday, will allow British police the same rights in other European Union countries. The one exception will be Britain's only common border with another EU member: that between Britain and Ireland. (The Telegraph - 21 November 2002)

EU foreign ministers agreed in principle to take over international police operations in Bosnia, reports the Financial Times. The mission to Bosnia would be the first civilian operation directly tied to the fledgling European security and defence policy (ESDP). The EU hopes to have a 60,000-strong rapid reaction force in place by 2003. The force would be capable of carrying out humanitarian, rescue and military missions inside or outside Europe. The force was declared partially operational at the Laeken summit at the end of last year, and now has some 5,000 police earmarked for deployment. 500 of these police will be sent to Bosnia to replace the UN-led international police task force whose mandate expires at the end of this year. According to EU diplomats, the aim of the EU force would be to train a professional Bosnia police body and build up policing structures that are still too weak. The EU must now reach agreement on how the police operation can be financed. The Commission, responsible for financing civilian operations, and the Council, which has no financial clout, have been wrangling over this issue for months. (Euobserver.com 29.01.2002)

DAVID BLUNKETT was accused of handing responsibility for policing over to a "pan-European" force yesterday after he unveiled proposals that would see EU officers carrying out investigations in Britain. Tory Euro-sceptics accused the Home Secretary of using the security emergency sparked by the September 11 attacks to introduce a scheme for European police teams. Officers from forces in other countries would work alongside their British counterparts to investigate international crime, Mr Blunkett announced in Spain. They would be based in Britain for investigations, but British officers would retain operational control. The proposal, supported by Spain, France and Belgium, will be put to the European Council of Ministers. Tories said the move would threaten the independence of British policing. Sir Teddy Taylor, the Conservative MP, said the proposal was deplorable. "It has been on the EU agenda for a long time. They are using the security problem to get it through." Mr Blunkett told an audience at the Universidad Europea in Madrid: "Our two governments, together with French and Belgian counterparts, are jointly sponsoring a proposal that would enable joint teams of investigators to fight particular crimes. "Taken together with mutual recognition and EU wide arrest powers, we can match the organisation of the organised criminal." Mr Blunkett is on a two-day visit to Spain, during which he also signed a new fast-track extradition treaty between the two countries. He also wants cross-border policing to combat international crime. A Home Office spokesman said pan-European police squads would allow the EU to tackle drug smuggling, terrorism and the traffic in asylum seekers. (D Telegraph: 24/11/2001) 

It has been revealed that the prosecution in Sweden used a manipulated video as evidence against a Göteborg demonstrator during the June EU Summit. The video was used at the case against Hannes Westberg, a 19-year-old demonstrator who was shot in his stomach by the police on 15 June. Police admit that the video sounds and pictures were manipulated so as to give a far more dramatic impression of the situation just before the youth was shot. "This is evidence produced in a court case, and as such should be produced in its original state. In this case, the material has been altered, and that is a criminal offence," says Christian Diesen, professor of penal law at Stockholm University, to Klassekampen. (EUobserver.com 23/11/01)

Germany and Italy advocated the setting up of an EU riot police force to combat violence with measured levels of force where necessary. A European police academy is being set up and such a police unit could be set up there. (Daily Telegraph 6/8/01) The German government has sent a proposal, dated 20 September, to the other EU member states calling for the formation of "special units to guarantee the safety of meetings of the European Council and other comparable events". According to Statewatch this would mean that instead of creating a formal EU paramilitary public order police force there would be a system in place for the movement and deployment of existing specially trained national units to police public order situations (for example, protests) in the host country. These units would have "weapons" and "special devices". Tony Bunyan, editor of Statewatch comments: "We are living in very dangerous times in many senses. The use of armed and specially trained paramilitary police units to counter protests in the EU will tend to escalate violence not diminish it. But, more importantly, it is part of a strategy to treat protesters as the same kind of 'threat' as terrorists. This can only lead to a curtailment of the right of free movement and the democratic right to demonstrate." (EUobserver.com 2/10/01)

A pan-European riot police force should be formed to follow violent anti-globalisation protestors from summit to summit, Otto Schily; Germany's interior minister, said yesterday. Mr Schily told a German newspaper: "In the long term I suggest the creation of a European riot police force, so that specially trained police forces can work in international cooperation to de-escalate situations where possible and combat violence with measured levels of force where necessary". "A European police academy is being set up following a German suggestion , and such a new European police unit could be set up there." Claudio Scajola, Italy's interior minister, supported Mr Schily's call, saying: "There is the need for a new and stronger collaboration among European countries and a European anti-riot force." (Daily Telegraph 6th August 2001)

THE European Union's top police agency, Europol, is under investigation by the Dutch criminal authorities for alleged fraud and money-laundering. The Dutch police have raided the Europol offices and private home of a French policeman following suspicions that stolen money has been diverted into a secret bank account in the tax haven of Bermuda. Investigators are systematically widening the inquiry to target some of the officers working in the computer and data section, the nerve centre of the Europol headquarters in The Hague. The mushrooming scandal uncovered by the Belgian newspaper De Morgen comes at a delicate moment for the elite agency, which is rapidly evolving from a small anti-drugs office into a sort of "Euro-FBI" with growing powers to launch investigations and tackle a wide range of cross-border crimes. The Belgian government, which takes over the EU's presidency at the end of this month, plans to table proposals giving Europol a greater role in fighting money-laundering and carrying out field operations in member states. Belgium has the backing of French and German leaders, who have called publicly for Europol to be converted into a fully fledged European police force. Europol is already authorised to investigate fraud, illegal immigration, trafficking in nuclear materials and ill-defined offences such as "corruption", "environmental crime", "racism and xenophobia". It can also play a role in cases of murder and grievous bodily injury. Last year it was given extra powers to tackle money-laundering stemming from "all forms of crime". Its budget has risen from £4 million in 1998 to £17 million in 2000, with 212 staff. Alleged corruption in the data collection office is an extremely sensitive issue. Civil rights groups are already alarmed that the agency is acquiring powers to store "soft data" on ordinary citizens, even if they are not accused of a crime. Under the Amsterdam Treaty, Europol is supposed to share some information with the European Parliament, but MEPs complain that it has refused to provide even the most elementary documents such as the full annual report. The main check on Europol is a management board appointed by the 15 EU justice ministers, which questions the director in secret session. A separate supervisory board examines the data protection angle, but has no operational oversight. Both bodies have had difficulty obtaining documents. Unlike national police officers, Europol staff are not compelled to testify in court and are immune from prosecution for "acts performed by them in the exercise of their official functions". This can be waived on the order of the director. (Daily Telegraph 2/6/01)

Britain is offering 450 policemen to the EU's new gendarmerie, a 5,000-man force for deployment in crisis spots by 2003. Italy has so far offered 900, France 800. The EU police force will be organised into "integrated units" combining officers from different states, with the support of judges and prison officials. It will have a 1,000-man rapid reaction unit, ready for duty within 30 days, with the job of "restoring law and order" in far-flung places. There are no plans to deploy the gendarmerie within the EU. (Daily Telegraph 12/5/01)

THE European Police Office, Europol, is refusing to submit to scrutiny by the European Parliament. It has provided a sanitised version of its annual report, claiming that operational details are confidential. The civil liberties group Statewatch has obtained a leaked version of the full report. It contains nothing that Could jeopardise operational security, suggesting that Europol is acquiring a taste for secrecy. Its budget has risen from €4 million in 1998 to €17 million in 2000, With 212 staff. Its powers are increasing by leaps and bounds as it evolves from a data centre for drug smuggling to a sort of Euro-FBI; dealing with terrorism, trafficking in immigrants, car theft, child pornography, organised crime, counterfeiting and even "xenophobia". A European Parliament report this year said it could turn into a "repressive monster." (Daily Telegraph 14/4/01)

A bill expected to be passed by the Commons today will give the Ministry of Defence police extensive powers allowing officers to arrest civilians anywhere in the country - akin, opponents say, to a national paramilitary force. The move, prompted in part by the force's inability under existing law to intervene in last year's fuel protests, is also opposed by MPs because the force is significantly less accountable than local police forces. The MoD argues that the bill is merely designed to allow its police to act in public order situations, or when a serious crime is being committed, without first having to get the permission of the local police. However, opponents believe the government wants to use the 3,700 officers in the MoD police to help make up the shortfall in local police forces and deploy them, in particular, during demonstrations. Up to now, the authority of the MoD police is restricted to MoD property and bases and military or civilian personnel living or working there. All MoD police can carry firearms. Despite assurances given to MPs by Geoff Honn, the defence secretary, during the committee stage of the bill, the MoD police are not formally subject to police complaints authority investigations, to the inspectorate of constabulary, or to the same disciplinary procedures as civilian police. Nor is the force accountable to an elected police authority. It is an MoD agency controlled by a senior civil servant and the defence secretary without outside scrutiny. It may be sensible to have an armed gendarmerie along the lines of paramilitary forces on the continent. It could also have a role in peacekeeping. But that was not what the government was arguing for. (Guardian 2/4/01)

In October, under the direction of the Belgian Minister of the Interior, Antoine Duquesne, the frontier police of the European Union and the group of candidate nations will begin a vast operation involving the European police which will see police from the West operating on the future eastern borders of the enlarged Union. Concretely, this will mean Belgians operating on the Byelorussian border, Danes at the international airport in Prague, Spanish in the port of Constanza etc. The goal of this three-day exercise is to give visibility to the European "third pillar", show that a European police exists, that it has common standards and that the eastern frontier of the Union is also a frontier that protects each of the countries in the west. (Belgian Le Soir 2/2/01)

THE European Union is creating a "repressive federal system" and its enforcement arm could become a "monster", according to a European Parliament report. Recent moves to build a common European judicial area are laying the foundations for an EU justice department backed by a federal police with ambitions to tackle "eurocrimes", concluded the study by a French jurist, Pierre Berthelet. The report, Police and Justice In the European Union, said: "Police and justice co-operation is in full mutation. It is no longer a simple co-operation between sovereign states." It was produced by the European Parliament's studies directorate but does not reflect the view of the institution. "Progressively, we're seeing the emergence of an embryonic federal system of repression: the creation of a federal police, Europol, a federal prosecutor embodied in Eurojust, and a concept of federal crimes, or eurocrimes." The report claimed that the European Police Office, Europol, was acquiring intrusive powers without being subjected to proper oversight by any democratic body. It said: "The lack of control could transform Europol into a monster." Europol began as a clearing house for information on drug trafficking, but can now demand crime data from member states, initiate investigations, and participate in joint police raids. Its agents have immunity from prosecution. (Electronic Telegraph 1/2/01)

In the Commission White Paper on Food Safety, under the somewhat opaque title of "fast track enforcement", the Commission proposed that, where non compliance with food safety law was observed, officials could deduct monies from subsidies that would otherwise have been paid out of EU funds, leaving Member States to make up the shortfall, which would, no doubt, amount to millions of pounds. But this is only one half of the equation. When it comes to knowing whether the EU laws have actually been enforced, the commission often professes to being totally in the dark. It has to rely on complaints from aggrieved individuals, where the standard of evidence required is so high that most complaints founder long before they get to the Courts. To remedy this, the Commission is proposing to create its own "police forces", to inspect operations in the various Member States, which will make reports directly to Brussels, on which action can be taken. Actually, the "police force" covering food safety matters has existed for some time, owing to the peculiar make-up of specific laws, in particular those covering the hygiene of slaughterhouses. Unlike most EU laws, these apply in detail not only to EU operations but also to plants in third countries which wish to export to the EU, resulting in commission officials being posted to these plants to inspect and license them. From this operation there has been built a cadre of inspectors which was given a formal identity in 1997 and the Food and Veterinary Office (FVO), with the new head office in Dublin. With 150 inspectors, the remit of the FVO has now expanded to cover all food operations, and their reach extends even to the small rural butcher in the furthest reaches of the UK. What is even more sinister is that a massive expansion in the force is now proposed, with manpower levels set to increase, initially to 600. When that is tied in to the proposals for direct penalties, it can be seen that we will shortly be facing an army of Euro-inspectors who can impose their will by extracting massive fines when their commands are not instantly obeyed. For the moment, however, this scheme is only intended for the food sector, as if that was not bad enough. But those wise to the ways of the EU know that, once the Commission has settled on a "good thing", it rarely leaves it there. By this means, with the precedent established for inspection of food operations by Eurocrats, and the imposition of direct penalties, it is no means fanciful to expect the same system to apply to the growing volume of environmental laws, to health and safety provisions and even trading standards (ie compulsory metrication). (Ian Geldard, London, 8 March 2000)

The Patten Report on policing in Northern Ireland drew the headlines with its proposed new oath removing references to the Queen and the Crown and emphasising the commitment to human rights and racial equality with no reference to upholding the law and preventing crime. Jack Straw is considering adopting that oath for all UK police forces. (October 1999 - The European Police Force - A New Threat To Britons by Lindsay Jenkins)

The police in England & Wales have much more freedom than Continental forces to launch investigations without judicial oversight. In future English policemen may find themselves going through more hoops before gathering evidence. (D Telegraph 30/11/98)

Against the globalization of crime, say the men of the outgoing Interior Minister, the Christian Democrat Manfred Kanther, we need a police force without frontiers. It is to be hoped, added Kanther himself yesterday, that Europol will soon enjoy broader powers. His probable successor, the Social Democrat Otto Schily, at once announced his agreement and went on to say : "The ideal model is precisely the American FBI. Europol will have to have resources and powers to investigate on its own account, as an independent investigative body." Schily is thinking of flanking Europol with a European judicial authority, a supra-national Public Prosecutor's office, equipped with broad investigative powers. On the subject of law and order Schroeder's SPD is determined to show that it is no less strict than Kohl's and Waigel's CDU-CSU.. So, Corpus Juris is already on the launching pad-Ed. (La Republica. 2 October 1998.Page 17)

Uclaf, the EU's previous anti-fraud unit, issued its annual report for 1998. It investigated 5,318 cases of suspected fraud, of which about 20% had proved to be fraud. The cases involved fraud worth hundreds of millions of euros. (FT 20/11/99)

UCLAF is an EU police force with the power to investigate EU fraud throughout the EU. It does not yet have the power to prosecute in member countries. (BBC 2 20/4/97). UCLAF is to be made more independent; becoming a task force attached to the Secretariat General. It is to increase its activities in the areas of intellectual property, EMU and the Euro, and work with eastern European countries. In 1996 the number of fraud cases detected increased from 4,552 to 5,612. A convention on protecting EU property was signed in 1996, but no country has yet ratified it. (CEC Week in Europe 7/5/98). A report from the European Court of Auditors and another from the European Parliament heap condemnation on the anti-fraud unit as being weak and ineffectual. The Commission has not given clear definition of the unit's powers to question officials or to search files and offices in Commission buildings. MEPs accuse it of only being concerned with keeping up appearances. Only a quarter of the staff carry out investigations and they are barred from searching houses or bank accounts of suspected civil servants. An investigator claimed that the unit was only responsible for establishing if a fraud had occurred, not who is responsible. The unit lacks independence. Obstruction by a high ranking Commission official delayed a corruption investigation for years. The suspected fraudsters had time to destroy the evidence. The unit is often paralysed by poor co-operation with national judicial and police authorities, poor knowledge of national legislation and lack of qualified staff. (European 6/7/98)

UCLAF has been re-placed by the new Fraud Prevention Office. The Fraud Prevention Office, OCLAF, is intended to combat any illegal activity harmful to the EU's financial interest, and investigate allegations of serious breaches of professional obligation by officials and others. All officials have a duty to co-operate with it and to supply information. (The Week in Europe 29 April 1999)

The EU intends to give Europe-wide powers to Europol. The intention is to communitarise justice and home affairs matters. (FT 16/12/96). Europol was conceived by the EU's justice and home affairs ministers using one of the Union's most arcane and secretive lawmaking structures. (E Voice 1/10/98). Europol has the potential to be misused as a method for controlling political opposition to European integration (Eurofacts 22/11/96). A police force answerable to the EU Commissioners is a grave threat to freedom and democracy. The Amsterdam Treaty gave Europol operational status. Europol was envisaged as a superior, federal force dealing with serious crimes: a kind of European FBI. Europol personnel can take part in national policing operations. Europol employees are immune to prosecution in national courts. (EuroFaq 2/2/98)

The Treaty of Amsterdam defined Europol's status: Title VI, article 29 of the TEU states: "...by developing common action among the Member States in the fields of police and judicial co- operation in criminal matters and by preventing and combating racism and xenophobia,"

Articles 32 & 34 give the Council (of Ministers) authority to determine the bounds of Europol activity - in other words to widen them as they see fit. Art.34 gives the Council the power to make (policing) conventions, which, once adopted by half the Member States, become binding on the rest .

Concern is growing that the new fraud prevention office being set up to replace the European commission's existing investigations unit. , UCLAF will not be truly independent. The new office will be set up within the commission and were almost certainly be headed by an official from the institution. Ironically, this is a weaker formula than that originally proposed by Commission President Jacques Santer, who called for the creation of a totally autonomous body to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by officials. (European Voice 25 March 1999)

The Times reported (17th February 1999) a dawn-raid carried out by officials of the European Commission on the offices of eight banks in France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Mr Karel Van Miert, the EU Competition Commissioner said he had authorised the raids after complaints that banks were conspiring to fix fees on foreign exchange and international payments. Although a number of UK regulatory bodies have similar powers of entry, they are clearly defined in law for all to see and are subject to challenge through the Courts. Exceptionally, the High Court may grant an 'Anton Pillar' Order permitting a plaintiff in a civil action to enter a defendant's premises without notice to inspect and remove documents or goods that may belong to the plaintiff. But such orders are rarely made and usually require an undertaking in damages if nothing incriminating is found. They are also hedged about with so many safeguards for the defendant that it bears little comparison with raids by the European Commission. Under the EU legal system, officialdom quite simply awards itself unfettered general powers to achieve their objectives. This is totally alien to the concepts of justice, liberty and freedom that our forebears fought so hard to secure and preserve. Any citizen who falls foul of EU officialdom has little or no redress. (Eurofaq posting D Samuel)

Four Austrian banks were the targets of dawn raids by Commission officials searching for evidence of an illegal cartel covering lending rates and other bank fees. (European Voice 25/6/98). An expert on Austrian banks said the margins on loans and deposits in Austria are the lowest in Europe and the idea of banks organising to keep rates down is absurd. The raids caused deep shock in Vienna, such things were not considered possible. (European 29/6/98)

Dawn raids: You need to look at Regulation 17/62/EEC and Article 14 in particular. This allows the Commission to undertake "all necessary investigations into undertakings and associations of undertakings" - by inspecting books, business records, "to ask for oral explanations on the spot" and "to enter any premises land and means of transport of undertakings." Under Art 14 (2) the officers undertaking such investigation must have an "authorisation in writing" that specifies the subject-matter and purpose of the investigation. This written authority does not have to come from a judge - the Commission provides it. Under Art 14 (3) written authority is replaced by a decision of the Commission, giving broadly similar information. "Undertakings and associations of undertakings shall submit to investigations ordered by decision of the Commission" (also Art 14 (3) of the Regulation). If an "undertaking opposes an investigation" the Member State concerned has to provide "escorts" to ensure that such resistance is futile (Art 14 (6) of the Regulation). The difference between the Art 14 2 and Art 14 3 procedures is that breach of the latter attracts fines of up to 5,000 units of account, fixed by the Commission, but subject to review by the ECJ. There is only a limited claim to legal professional privilege: AM & S -v- Commission Case No 155/79 (in-house lawyers and lawyers from non-EC countries lose out here, and the claim is narrower for the rest). (Eurofaq posting D Radlett 3/12/98)

European police are to be allowed to operate in the UK with same powers as British officers. They will have full authority to stop and search suspects and make arrests under a mutual assistance deal being negotiated by the Home Office. It is also considering agreeing to requests for search and seizing of property here. (Daily express 12 May 1999) (FFP)

How will Europol be authorised to take part in investigations onto terrorist offences? In some member states these are primarily the responsibility of military rather than police authorities. (European Voice 1/10/98)

There is concern about how secure Europol files will be. Particular concern centres on the intention to share information with police forces in eastern and central European countries currently lining up to join the EU. Critics have raised the spectre of the Mafiosi gaining access to information on informers and embarking on revenge killings. Europol will hold an enormous amount of sensitive personal data and it is not subject to any real democratic control. Its staff have diplomatic immunity making it extremely difficult to investigate alleged malpractice. These concerns have been compounded by the arrest of a Belgian lawyer who was caught selling confidential information held on the Schengen zone's central computer to criminal gangs. (European Voice 1/10/98)

In keeping with the inter-governmental philosophy underpinning the Third Pillar of the EU, the Member States and their various law enforcement authorities have their own liaison officers within Europol. These liaison officers have access to some 40 national police and customer information systems as well as a number of administrative files and business registers, making Europol a unique clearing house for information relating to organised crime. This enables research and analysis on offenders, groups of offenders, addresses, phone numbers, and so on. Some information is so-called 'soft information', which has not yet been corroborated and requires evaluation before it can be useful for police work... In addition, within the next two years we will be setting up a database of criminal activity and persons involved in organised crime, which will be accessible in all 15 Member States. I might add that this database would mainly be made up of data supplied by the Member States themselves. Then, for the first time, we will have a common pool of information, readily accessible for operational purposes, which also provides a European overview of serious and organised crime.... Europol is not designed to function like a European FBI. The Convention does not give Europol any executive authority. Europol officials will not be empowered to arrest criminals, carry out searches or seize evidence. There would be no EU-wide legal basis for discharging any such powers... Longer term I would like to see a serious study into the possibilities of a European Prosecutor to supervise international criminal investigations. Here too, Europol could provide the model as well as the practical means for making this happen.(Police Foundation Lecture, 21st September 1999,The Role of Europol in International Law Enforcement Co-operation, Jurgen Storbeck Director of Europol)

Euro-cops will be free to break the law in the name of stopping international crime. The British public would be left with no adequate safeguard or redress against the officer's actions which could result in the loss of civil liberties. Although Foreign Secretary Robin Cook gave an assurance that he would resist any immunity being granted to Europol the Government has now refused to block the EU plans. (PA News 14/2/98). Europol will extend its activities from the present drug and nuclear trafficking and illegal immigration to murder, personal injury, corruption, racism, environmental crime and xenophobia. Europol is only answerable in secret to an EU management board. (Telegraph 2/2/98) (FFP). The EC wants to extend Europol's powers to cover counterfeighting as well (D Telegraph 23/7/98). The UK is opposing proper judicial protection for the individual under the Europol cross-border intelligence agency (FT June 95). The Europol Convention authorises Europol to keep secret records of, inter alia, suspects, persons likely to commit crimes, possible future witnesses, victims and possible future victims and persons who can provide information. Up to 52 types of information can be stored on each individual including: financial, skills, behavioural data, lifestyle, routine, character traits, data on individual's racial origins, nationality, political affiliation and religion. Europol can draw data from police, public bodies and private bodies ((Telegraph 2/2/98) (FFP)

There is a proliferation of police liaison groups in Europe involving EU and other countries. These include K4, PWGOT, Kilowatt, the Berne Club, the Vienna Group, Europol, the Star Group. These groups lack accountability so there is no possibility of redress. Their budgets are not known even though they carry out operations against groups and individuals and there is no scrutiny by parliamentarians at national or EU level.(Independent 6/12/93 on report from Leicester University). Three Welsh brothers named Rhys are wrongly branded as football hooligans. They have been arrested, held in cells, searched, photographed, denied access to lawyers, and deported to England when they go to support the Welsh team. They have taken their case to the European Commission because the Data Protection Registrar, the Belgian and British police have refused to amend their records. (Independent 9/9/94). They have won their case in the European Court of Human Rights. (BBC R 5 15/5/00)

Erroneous intelligence held on UK police computers can be used in EEC courts (C4 TV). There is a proliferation of police liaison groups in Europe involving EU and other countries. These include K4, PWGOT, Kilowatt, the Berne Club, the Vienna Group, Europol, the Star Group. These groups lack accountability so there is no possibility of redress. Their budgets are not known even though they carry out operations against groups and individuals and there is no scrutiny by parliamentarians at national or EU level.(Independent 6/12/93 on report from Leicester University). Three Welsh brothers named Rhys are wrongly branded as football hooligans. They have been arrested, held in cells, searched, photographed, denied access to lawyers, and deported to England when they go to support the Welsh team. They have taken their case to the European Commission because the Data Protection Registrar, the Belgian and British police have refused to amend their records. (Independent 9/9/94).

Article 35.6: "The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to rule on... any rule of law relating to its [the Treaty's] application, or misuse of powers." This specifically addresses actions brought by Member States, but presumably that will include actions brought against their own citizens.

Article 36.2 "fully associates" the Commission with the work of Europol, etc. In other words, they now have their own enforcers. (The Democracy Movement, Bristol Branch 15/10/98)

The EU-wide police force, Europol, is to be given the most extraordinary powers, including the right to store data on people's political views, religious beliefs and sexual orientation. The force will be subject to no effective democratic control. Its officers will be, for actions taken in the course of their duties, immune from prosecution. The European Court of Justice will have no say if disputes arise between member states or between Europol and national authorities. In other words, Europol officers will be able to operate on the territory of member states under no democratic, popular or judicial control. (Spectre News)