Police and Judicial Cooperation in Europe: Bilateral Versus Multilateral Cooperation (From International Police Cooperation: Emerging Issues, Theory and Practice, P 25-41, 2010, Frederic Lemieux, ed. - See NCJ-230937)

• NCJ Number: 230938
• Author(s): Laure Guille
• Date Published: 2010
• Length: 17 pages
• Sale Source: Willan Publishing
• Publication Format: Book Chapter
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Based on data from four European countries (France, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Luxembourg), this chapter examines whether Europol and Eurojust, which are agencies involved in multilateral police and judicial cooperation, produce more effective police cooperation than traditional bilateral arrangements.

Abstract

The chapter concludes that even though bilateral cooperation among European national police and courts may be viewed as obsolete in Europe, it still prevails. Currently, bilateral agreements and the exchange of information remain the most effective means of police and judicial cooperation; however, this chapter suggests that bilateral agreements should be viewed as an interim stage that cannot substitute for European multilateral structures of cooperation. Various factors have impeded multilateral forms of cooperation, such as Europol and Eurojust, from being fully exploited. Among these factors are a lack of awareness and trust, chaotic and political management and functioning, and issues related to sovereignty and the sharing of "hot information." Improvement is needed in order to ensure rapid and efficient procedures for sharing information and coordinating action. The right balance must be found between the mechanisms of cooperation and the development of trust. Bilateral cooperation continues to be essential and should never be excluded when the context demands it. The foundation for this research was an examination of inter-country police, prosecution, and judicial assistance on criminal matters. The research used an empirical model, with face-to-face interviews conducted in various countries with police officers, civil servants, prosecutors, customs, diplomatic representatives at the Council of the European Union, liaison officers, liaison magistrates, and members of the judiciary, as well as members of Europol and Eurojust. The interviews were supplemented with periods of observation at border zones and centers for police and customs cooperation. Internships were undertaken in relevant institutions. 16 notes