• Home /
• News /
• 2004 /
• June /
• When the EU adopts anti-terrorism measures is it trying to combat terrorism or crime?

When the EU adopts anti-terrorism measures is it trying to combat terrorism or crime?

01 June 2004

- UK parliamentary committee says the supposed link between terrorism and organised crime in the Commission Communication is based: "more on assertion than on evidence"
- Commission proposal on exchange of information on terrorism could lead to hundreds of innocent people being put on "watch-lists" for each anti-terrorist investigation
- Companies, charities and all bank accounts to be targeted
- European Criminal Registry to be set up including data on all those charged - whether found guilty or not

At the EU Summit meeting (the 25 Prime Ministers) in Brussels on 17-18 June 2004 will adopt a new Action Plan on terrorism and a series of reports in the wake of 11 March 2004 (Madrid), see: Summit documents

On 24 March Statewatch published a detailed analysis of the 57 measures being put forward following 11 March 2004 (Madrid) by the Council of the European Union (the 15 EU governments) and the European Commission. The analysis found that 27 of the measures had little or nothing to do with tackling terrorism including measures to do with crime in general and the surveillance of telecommunications (phone-calls, e-mails, faxes, internet usage) and of movement. This strategy begs the question whether there is, at the highest level, a confusion of aims and effort.

The Action Plans for the Summit (from the Council of the Europe Union and the European Commission) are peppered with references to a Commission Communication dated 29 March 2004 (COM 221), which is a classic demonstration of confused aims. This contains a proposal for a Council Decision on exchanging "information and cooperation concerning terrorists offences" (see below) and a "wish-list" on criminal matters. The logic is to bring together the:

"Union's arsenal of weapons against terrorism. Many of these are not specifically anti-terrorism but range wider while including terrorism [and] a link should be established between terrorism and other forms of crime" [even though these are] not always immediately obvious..if the fight against terrorism is to be totally effective, it must be handled in conjunction with the fight against other forms of crime."

It argues that the connection is, in part, through the use of "similar" methods and proposes everybody’s (convicted criminal or not) bank accounts should be "registered" and "be accessible to law enforcement agencies". Companies and charitable organisations too are to be targeted because they could be "infiltrated" by terrorists. Everyone, across whole spheres of everyday life, are to registered and recorded to try and track down terrorist "suspects" - of course, the same information - once collected and accessible to a host of state agencies - could equally be used for other purposes which have nothing to do with terrorism.

The big project is the proposed creation of a "European Criminal Record" to be held on a "European Criminal Registry" - which according to a Commission spokesperson would contain not only all convictions and disqualifications but also all charges brought (even of those found innocent at trial) from the whole of the EU - in "the fight against crime, and in particular terrorism".

The simplistic notion in the Commission Communication is that there is an intrinsic link between terrorism and organised crime and indeed all crime - an argument which, if turned around, implies that all crime is linked to terrorism.

Framework Decision: exchanging information

The specific proposal in the Communication is a draft Council Decision on "the exchange of information and cooperation concerning terrorist offences". This envisages in Article 2 the exchange of "information" during investigations and prosecutions concerning terrorist offences as set out in Article 1 to 3 of the 2002 Framework Decision on combating terrorism (see: Critique). The "info