Minister Luhtanen at the JURI Committee in Brussels

Distinguished Chairman,
Distinguished members of the JURI-Committee,

My first trip as Chairperson of the Justice and Home Affairs Council brings me to the European Parliament. I consider this a good way to begin our EU Presidency. On the basis of my fifteen years’ of experience as a Member of Parliament, I am well aware of the role that parliamentarianism plays in the legitimacy of politics. This year, we in Finland have had reason to recall this in connection with the centennial of the Parliament of Finland, which is the oldest fully democratically elected Parliament in the world.

I am pleased that some members of your Committee had the opportunity to visit Finland at the beginning of last month. Also when I visited Strasbourg exactly a month ago I again had the opportunity to meet members of your Committee. I believe that we have succeeded in establishing a fruitful dialogue and a good spirit of cooperation. I regard this as particularly important in our sector of responsibility, which deals directly with the most important interests of the citizens of our Union.

Distinguished Members of the Committee,

As Parliamentarians you know that the trust of citizens is not something that can be secured once and for all. It must be earned time and time again. This applies also to European integration. Certain doubts have increased among our citizens towards the entire process of integration, and towards the Union that represents it. We can see the consequences of a lack of trust also in connection with the Constitutional Treaty, even though the majority of Member States have come out in support of the Treaty.

We must win back the trust of our citizens. It is for this reason that, in justice matters, we place particular stress on the perspective of EU citizens and on continuity in the development of the EU.

The transparency of the work of the Union is an important element of our Presidency programme. If we do not trust our citizens, how can we expect our citizens to trust us? For this reason we are promoting public access to documents, we are ensuring effective information to the public, and we are increasing the openness of Council meetings.

From now on, all stages in the co-decision procedure shall primarily be public. We shall be increasing publicity also in respect of other types of decisions, so that citizens would better be able to see how the EU is safeguarding their rights and their safety. We shall ensure that the open parts of meetings are relayed over the Internet so that the transparency of meetings does not remain merely a phrase.

Distinguished Members of the European Parliament,

One of the key projects during the Finnish EU-Presidency shall be the review of the Hague Programme. The implementation of this Programme, adopted one and a half years ago, has proven to be more difficult and slow than anticipated. During the informal Ministerial meeting in Tampere this September, we shall be considering how to better promote the central priorities. I hope that also the JURI Committee shall be represented at the Tampere meeting.

In the justice sector, these central priorities include, for example, mutual recognition of the decisions of national judicial authorities, and cooperation in civil matters. The review of the Hague Programme shall not mean a renegotiation of the Programme at Tampere. What is at stake is the creation of a new dynamism in order to attain the goals upon which we have already agreed.

The Euro-barometer and other opinion surveys show time and again that justice and home affairs constitute the sector in which EU activity has the strongest support from our citizens. Our citizens deserve something in exchange for their support.

It is for this reason that we intend to examine the possibilities, on the basis of the current Treaties, of improving decision-making in police cooperation and in cooperation in criminal matters. The European Council has given us the mandate for this. One of the greatest reasons why initiatives are not moving forward is that decisions in Council must be made by consensus. This slows decision-making and often leads to compromises which weaken the quality of legislation. In addition, it has often been observed that the European Parliament has not been provided with a sufficiently significant role in police cooperation and cooperation in criminal matters.

As a response to these challenges, Finland intends to take up the question of the so-called bridging clause, based on article 42 of the present Treaty on the European Union. This clause allows the transfer of action on matters from the third to the first pillar, where the position of the European Parliament and also of the Court of Justice is considerably stronger.

This is of particular significance in important questions that concern the rights, freedom and security of citizens. At the same time, we can decide to adopt decisions by qualified majority.

I do not see that improving decision-making on the basis of the existing Treaties would be counter to the entry into force of the Constitutional Treaty. On the contrary, I am convinced that the greatest barrier to the development of the Union and, through this, the greatest barrier also to the Constitutional Treaty is the lack of confidence on the part of our citizens. Increasing the effectiveness of decision-making in police cooperation and cooperation in criminal matters shows that we are encouraging a Union that listens to her citizens and is able to respond to their expectations.

Finland regards the Constitutional Treaty as a balanced over-all solution, and intends to ratify it already during her EU Presidency.

Distinguished Members of the Committee,

The integration of Europe has led to an unprecedented increase in cross-border contacts. This is true of the economy as well as of EU citizens. It is thus specifically our sector of activity that provides unique opportunities to achieve results that provide a true benefit in the every-day life of citizens and in commercial activities.

Our citizens are crossing borders, they are going on holiday, they are buying goods and services or they are working abroad. Many are getting married, establishing families and getting divorced abroad. Both small and large companies benefit from the mobility of employees, goods, capital and services.

As a result, cross-border legal relationships are becoming as varied and complex as legal relationships within a country. The ideal goal, of course, would be that no one would be faced with legal uncertainty simply because they have crossed the borders between Member States. After all, the essence of integration is that it encourages the crossing of national borders.

In my opinion, Austria has attended to her duties as holder of the EU Presidency in an excellent manner. We shall continue where Austria left off. Progress has been made in many difficult initiatives, for example small claims and Rome II. Even so, many important initiatives remain to be dealt with.

We shall seek progress on the recognition of decisions on maintenance, on Rome I, which deals with the law applicable to contractual relationships, and on alternative dispute resolution. Our goal is that the decision on small claims and the European payment order would be adopted during our Presidency.

I know that the European Parliament has some reservations concerning the political agreement that has been reached on Rome II. I hope that the matter can be resolved without having to resort to the conciliation procedure.

In respect of the initiative on the service of documents, it would be highly desirable to reach a joint position and have this adopted during our Presidency. I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Jean-Paul Gauzès, for his patience in the face of the postponement of the plenary discussion to July.

All of these projects that I have referred to deal directly with fundamental interests of our citizens, even if the projects often appear to be quite abstract. By showing that the Union is producing precisely the type of practical results that all too few citizens no longer expect, we would best be able to strengthen the confidence that our citizens have in the European Union.

Distinguished Members of the European Parliament,

Organized crime and terrorism are a challenge to the durability of the principles of the rule of law. The perspective of our citizens requires that justice and home affairs be developed in a balanced manner. The rights of our citizens must be safeguarded even during difficult times. In this respect, the cooperation between Minister Rajamäki and me has been excellent in Finland, and it shall continue to be so when we share the responsibility for chairing the Council.

Indeed, Finland’s key goals include the establishment of the Fundamental Rights Agency, the proposal on minimum procedural rights, and the proposal on data protection in the third pillar. The strengthening of the fundamental rights dimension is an integral part of the development of the area of freedom, security and justice. Our concrete goal is to ensure agreement on the Fundamental Rights Agency. We have a clear mandate from the European Council of last June to do so.

In addition, we shall focus heavily on the proposal for a framework decision on the transfer of convicted persons to their country of citizenship or residence. This would promote the rehabilitation of prisoners and therefore also the safety of all our citizens.

Distinguished Members of the European Parliament,

As a result of the decision of the Court of Justice, we shall have to consider again the agreement between the EU and the United States on the transfer of passenger name records. Our fundamental goal as the holder of the EU Presidency also in this connection is safeguarding the interests of EU citizens.

From this point of view, the worst possible outcome would be to enter a situation where no agreement is in force, where each country and each airline would seek its own solutions. This would undoubtedly weaken the protection of passenger data. The transfer of SWIFT account data to the authorities of a third country shows what data protection problems can arise in such a situation.

We must negotiate an agreement with the United States on the transfer of passenger name records before the first of October, in order to avoid a situation where there are no agreements in force. The Presidency shall ensure that the European Parliament is kept abreast of the progress in the negotiations.

Distinguished Chairman,
Distinguished members of the JURI Committee,

I would like to thank Austria for excellent work in chairing the Justice and Home Affairs Council. Finland shall continue this work and, in the same way, engage in an open and productive dialogue with the European Parliament.

I would like to thank you for your attention and I am happy to be at your disposal to answer your questions.