Select Committee on European Union Written Evidence


NORWAY AND ICELAND PARTICIPATION IN EU JUDICIAL CO-OPERATION

Letter from Caroline Flint MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Home Office to the Chairman

  I am writing to inform you about the progress of negotiations between the EU and Norway and Iceland regarding their potential participation in the 2000 Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (the MLAC) and its 2001 Protocol, and the European Arrest Warrant (the EAW).

  Norway and Iceland are full participants in the Schengen aquis. They are therefore entitled to participate in those aspects of EU agreements that are deemed to build on the provisions of the Schengen aquis. Consequently, they will participate in the Schengen building aspects of the MLAC and its Protocol by virtue of provisions included in those agreements when originally negotiated.

  However, on 10 July 2001, the Presidency, at the request of Norway and Iceland, was granted a mandate to negotiate an agreement on their accession to the non-Schengen related parts of the MLAC and the Schengen-building parts of the 1995 and 1996 Extradition Conventions. The former was a logical consequence of their partial participation in the MLAC, whilst the latter rectified the fact that the 1995 and 1996 Extradition Convention pre-dated the incorporation of the Schengen Acquis into the EU Treaties. This mandate was subsequently amended to include the 2001 Protocol to the MLAC. In relation to extradition, Norway and Iceland also declared a wish to participate in the EAW, which superceded the extradition arrangements in the 1995 and 1996 Conventions.

  The Presidency's negotiations have continued on this basis over the past two years. It recently sought Member States' views on a number of outstanding questions, with a view to finalising the negotiations in the near future, although no fixed timetable has been set.

  In relation to mutual legal assistance, Member States are content for the provisions of the MLAC and Protocol to be extended to Norway and Iceland in their entirety, and the few outstanding issues, relating to the procedural articles of the Agreements rather than the substance, have largely been resolved. However, negotiations on the application of the EAW to Norway and Iceland are proving more complex.

  The Government supports the extension of the MLA agreements and the EAW to Norway and Iceland in their entirety. Extension of the MLAC and Protocol to cover Norway and Iceland will result in more streamlined and uniform mutual legal assistance arrangements where the same rules will apply to our MLA relations with all Schengen members. Our own partial participation in Schengen in any case required some legislative change in order to meet our commitments to Norway and Iceland under the MLA provisions of Schengen. We consider full extension of the MLA agreements to be more practical than operating slightly different systems for the EU Member States on the one hand and the two non-EU Schengen states on the other.

  The practical arguments are even stronger for. extension of the EAW by the UK to requests from Norway and Iceland, in the light of the UK's partial adoption of Schengen. We would otherwise be operating a distinctly different system of extradition specifically to cater for the small number of requests from those two countries.

  No further legislative change is required in order to give effect to the extension of these agreements to Norway and Iceland. The Crime (International Co-operation) Bill will enable us to operate the MLAC and Protocol with Norway and Iceland, and the Extradition Bill will enable the operation of the EAW system between the UK and those countries. We anticipate that we shall be able to do this, even if, under the terms of the agreement, other Member States and Norway/Iceland choose not to operate some specific EAW provisions in arrangements between themselves.

  As is usual in the case of an ongoing negotiation for an EU third country agreement, the documents are classified and cannot therefore be deposited for scrutiny. I will however keep you informed of progress towards finalising the Agreements over the coming months and will formally deposit the Council Decision to conclude the Agreement for scrutiny when it becomes available.

8 September 2003


 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004