E-Book, Englisch, Band 83, 267 Seiten, Format (B × H): 153 mm x 227 mm
Reihe: Schriftenreihe des Arbeitskreises Europäische Integration e.V.
Opportunities and Limitations
E-Book, Englisch, Band 83, 267 Seiten, Format (B × H): 153 mm x 227 mm
Reihe: Schriftenreihe des Arbeitskreises Europäische Integration e.V.
ISBN: 978-3-8452-5028-1
Verlag: Nomos
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)
What has changed since then, which problems persist? What is the practical impact of the new rules established by the Treaty of Lisbon? How does the European Parliament use its extended co-decision powers in this field? What is the new role of human rights and data protection? Contributions by scholars from different disciplines and by practitioners analyse continuity and change of police cooperation in the EU in a political, legal and practical perspective.
Contributions by: Jan Philipp Albrecht (MEP), Karsten Behn, Ludo Block, Monica den Boer, Gertjan Boulet, Olivier Cahn, Cyrille Fijnaut, Laura Füger, Mario Gruschinske, Daniela Heid, Paul De Hert, Nathalie Hirschmann, Hans-Gerd Jaschke, Daniela Kietz, Wilhelm Knelangen, Michael Niemeier, Bettina Rauch-Schulz, Peter Schaar, Funda Tekin and Hartmut Aden
Autoren/Hrsg.
Fachgebiete
Weitere Infos & Material
1;Cover;1
2; Police cooperation in the EU before and after the Treaty of Lisbon – continuity and innovation;16
2.1; 1. The historical, political and legal framework of police cooperation before and after the Treaty of Lisbon;17
2.2; 2. Convergence of police professionalism?;18
2.3; 3. The state of empirical research on police cooperation in the EU;18
2.4; 4. Information sharing and data protection as core issues for police cooperation;20
2.5; 5. Conclusion: police cooperation in the Lisbon framework: opportunities, limitations and new synergies;21
2.6; References;22
3; Part 1: Police cooperation in the European Union before and after the Treaty of Lisbon: historical, political and legal framework;24
3.1; Revolution or evolution through the Treaty of Lisbon: police cooperation in Europe in a broader historical context;26
3.1.1; 1. The early history of police cooperation in Europe;27
3.1.1.1; 1.1 Gradual improvement and reinforcement of cross-border police cooperation before the First World War;27
3.1.1.2; 1.2 The rise and fall of the Internationale Kriminalpolizeiliche Kommission;30
3.1.1.3; 1.3 The difficult (re-)establishment of Interpol after the Second World War;31
3.1.2; 2. Turbulent times (1975 to 2005);32
3.1.2.1; 2.1 The founding of TREVI in 1975;32
3.1.2.2; 2.2 From Schengen 1985 to Maastricht 1992;34
3.1.2.3; 2.3 From Maastricht in 1992 to Amsterdam in 1998 to The Hague in 2005;36
3.1.2.4; 2.4 The draft European constitution of 2003;38
3.1.3; 3. The Treaty of Lisbon;41
3.1.3.1; 3.1 Police cooperation in the new treaty;41
3.1.3.2; 3.2 Exploiting the new margin for action;44
3.1.4; 4. Conclusion;46
3.1.5; References;47
3.2; Policy making in policing and criminal justice under Lisbon rules: more democratic, more complex, and more conflict-prone;50
3.2.1; 1. Formal legitimacy: strong parliamentary involvement in decision making;51
3.2.1.1; 1.1. Co-decision is the new norm;51
3.2.1.2; 1.2. Parliamentary oversight of external affairs;52
3.2.2; 2. Structural rather than transitional: sovereignty reflexes and turf wars;54
3.2.2.1; 2.1. Inter-institutional wrangling over the Schengen evaluations;55
3.2.2.2; 2.2 Continuous tensions over policy planning and agenda setting;56
3.2.3; 3. Stronger fundamental rights protection: who delivers?;58
3.2.3.1; 3.1 Parliament as a co-legislator in internal security: becoming more security oriented;59
3.2.3.2; 3.2 Under pressure: Parliament and data surveillance;60
3.2.4; 4. Conclusions: more democratic, more complex, more conflict-prone;62
3.2.5; References;62
3.3; Before and after the Treaty of Lisbon: the legal framework of police cooperation in the EU compared;66
3.3.1; 1. First common steps of the European Communities to build cooperation in the area of police and justice;66
3.3.2; 2. Schengen Agreement, 1985 – “step-by-step abolition of border controls for persons”;67
3.3.2.1; 2.1 Development of the Schengen Agreement;67
3.3.2.2; 2.2 Schengen Agreement status today;68
3.3.3; 3. Maastricht Treaty;69
3.3.3.1; 3.1 A common policy in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice;69
3.3.3.2; 3.2 Agencies;70
3.3.3.2.1; 3.2.1 Eurojust;70
3.3.3.2.2; 3.2.2 Europol;71
3.3.3.3; 3.2.3 CEPOL;73
3.3.4; 4. Treaty of Amsterdam;73
3.3.4.1; 4.1 Basic amendments by the Treaty of Amsterdam;73
3.3.4.2; 4.2 Allocation and regulation of police cooperation under the Amsterdam Treaty;73
3.3.4.3; 4.3 Possible legal acts under the Amsterdam Treaty;74
3.3.5; 5. Lisbon Treaty;75
3.3.5.1; 5.1 General remarks;75
3.3.5.2; 5.2 Police Cooperation (Article 87 TFEU);75
3.3.5.3; 5.3 Legal acts;76
3.3.5.4; 5.4 Enhanced cooperation between different national police forces in the European Union;76
3.3.6; 6. The (new) role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) after the Lisbon Treaty;77
3.3.7; 7. Conclusion;78
3.3.8; References;79
3.4; Differentiated integration: ever more relevant for police cooperation after the Treaty of Lisbon?;82
3.4.1; 1. Differentiated integration: what’s the deal?;83
3.4.1.1; 1.1 Concepts and forms of differentiated integration;83
3.4.1.2; 1.2 Motivation for differentiated integration in police cooperation;86
3.4.2; 2. Derogation systems in police cooperation before and after the Lisbon Treaty;88
3.4.2.1; 2.1 Enhanced cooperation, emergency brake and acceleration;88
3.4.2.2; 2.2 The Schengen and Prüm laboratories;90
3.4.2.3; 2.3 Opt-outs, opt-ins and the block opt-out;92
3.4.3; 3. Implications of differentiated integration in police cooperation under the Lisbon Treaty;95
3.4.3.1; 3.1 The complexity of the derogation systems;95
3.4.3.2; 3.2 The Lisbonisation of the acquis;96
3.4.3.3; 3.3 The decision-making with qualified majority;96
3.4.4; 4. Conclusions;97
3.4.5; References;97
4; Part 2: Police cooperation, police professionalism and police training;100
4.1; Police professionalism in the European Union;102
4.1.1; 1. Mapping the police professional community in Europe;103
4.1.2; 2. Defining police professionalism in Europe;105
4.1.3; 3. Benchmarking with adjacent European professional communities;106
4.1.4; 4. The effect of the European Union on police professionalisation;109
4.1.5; 5. The wheel of European police professionalism;110
4.1.6; 6. Police professionalism in Europe: towards convergence?;114
4.1.7; 7. Concluding notes: challenges and opportunities;116
4.1.8; References;118
4.2; Police training and police studies in the EU Member States: towards higher standards by coordination?;120
4.2.1; 1. Police training and education in the EU;122
4.2.2; 2. The Bologna accreditation process at police academies and police universities in the EU;125
4.2.3; 3. The role of police studies and police science;127
4.2.4; 4. Discussion and outlook;130
4.2.5; References;132
5; Part 3: Police cooperation in practice: empirical insights;134
5.1; Imbalances in an expanding research area: the widely neglected practical dimension of EU internal security policy;136
5.1.1; 1. The delayed perception of considerable dynamics;136
5.1.2; 2. Why the practical dimension matters: the “practical cooperation gap”;140
5.1.3; 3. Conclusions: Plea for a more balanced approach in internal security research;142
5.1.4; References;143
5.2; Do Council instruments matter? The effect of Council instruments on practical police cooperation in the EU;148
5.2.1; 1. Research;150
5.2.2; 2. Findings;153
5.2.3; 3. Analysis, conclusion and outlook;160
5.2.4; References;163
5.3; European and international cooperation in practice: the case of the Berlin Police;166
5.3.1; 1. The Berlin Police involved in international projects;167
5.3.1.1; 1.1 Twinning;167
5.3.1.2; 1.2 Leonardo da Vinci;168
5.3.1.3; 1.3 Stability Pact South and Eastern Europe;169
5.3.1.4; 1.4 Other forms of projects;170
5.3.2; 2. Exchange of information;170
5.3.3; 3. International encounters;173
5.3.4; 4. EU developments in the JHA area;174
5.3.4.1; 4.1 Training on EU and international matters;174
5.3.5; 5. Assignments and deployments abroad;176
5.3.6; 6. Conclusions;176
5.4; Effective cross-border knowledge sharing between police forces – the German-Polish Police and Customs Cooperation Centre (PCCC);178
5.4.1; 1. Police and Custom Cooperation Centres as instrument of cross-border policing;179
5.4.2; 2. The COMPOSITE case study on the ?wiecko PCCC: methodology;181
5.4.3; 3. Results of the ?wiecko PCCC case study;183
5.4.3.1; 3.1 General assessment of effectiveness of cross-border knowledge sharing;183
5.4.3.2; 3.2 Facilitators of cross-border police knowledge sharing;184
5.4.3.3; 3.3 Barriers to effective cross-border knowledge sharing;185
5.4.3.4; 3.4 The perceived practical relevance of the Treaty of Lisbon as legal framework for European police cooperation;186
5.4.4; 4. Discussion and outlook;187
5.4.5; References;189
5.5; Contributions of Member States to EU police external operations;190
5.5.1; 1. Motives of Member States’ involvement in EU PEO;191
5.5.1.1; 1.1 Disparities in Member States’ involvement in EU PEOs;192
5.5.1.2; 1.2 Explanations of Member States’ low involvement in EU PEOs;193
5.5.2; 2. Improvements brought by the Lisbon Treaty?;198
5.5.2.1; 2.1 Limited corrective effect of the Treaty of Lisbon;198
5.5.2.2; 2.2 Gloomy perspectives;200
5.5.2.3; Annex 1: Percentage of the Member States’ (EU 27) total number of police officers seconded to EU PEO*;202
5.5.2.4; Annex 2: Agreements on police external operations;202
5.5.3; References;204
6; Part 4: Information sharing among police agencies under the Treaty of Lisbon;208
6.1; Police information sharing and data protection in the European Union before and after the Treaty of Lisbon;210
6.1.1; 1. Why has information sharing become ever more important for police cooperation in Europe?;210
6.1.1.1; 1.1 Information, knowledge and secrecy as core elements of policing;210
6.1.1.2; 1.2 Technical evolution;211
6.1.2; 2. Centralised and network based information sharing before and after Lisbon;212
6.1.2.1; 2.1 Centralised databases under the Treaty of Lisbon;212
6.1.2.2; 2.2 Information sharing through networks under the Treaty of Lisbon;213
6.1.3; 3. Data protection and policing before and after the Treaty of Lisbon;214
6.1.4; 4. Police information sharing and data protection in the Lisbon framework – new synergies? Conclusion and outlook;215
6.1.5; References;216
6.2; Conflicts between data protection harmonisation and a high level of protection: shortcomings of the European Commission’s proposal for a Police and Justice Directive;218
6.2.1; 1. The state of data protection in the EU Member States;218
6.2.2; 2. Constitutional standards for data protection: the German example;220
6.2.3; 3. Consequences for future EU law;220
6.2.4; 4. Conclusion and outlook;221
6.2.5; References;222
6.3; EU police cooperation and information sharing: more influence for the European Parliament?;224
6.3.1; 1. Technocrats’ wishlists – the era of surveillance;225
6.3.2; 2. Boundless information exchange – the end of meaning and purpose;226
6.3.3; 3. The loss of proportionality – the blanket retention of data;228
6.3.4; 4. Data collection does not prevent terror – what really counts;229
6.3.5; 5. An alternative security police for Europe – effective crime fighting;231
6.3.6; 6. Conclusion: limitations to the European Parliaments’ new role;232
6.3.7; References;233
6.4; The exchange of information between police organisations in the EU under the Treaty of Lisbon – routine and difficulties from a practical perspective;236
6.4.1; 1. Schengen Information System (SIS);237
6.4.2; 2. Principle of availability;238
6.4.2.1; 2.1 Swedish Initiative;238
6.4.2.2; 2.2 Prüm Cooperation;239
6.4.3; 3. Joint Investigation Teams (JITs);240
6.4.4; 4. Joint Centres;241
6.4.5; 5. EPRIS excursus;241
6.4.6; 6. Outlook;242
6.4.7; 7. Conclusion;243
6.4.8; References;244
6.5; Cooperation between the private sector and law enforcement agencies: an area in between legal regulations;246
6.5.1; 1. The EU dichotomy between public law enforcement processing of data and other (public or private) processing of data;247
6.5.2; 2. Cooperation between the private sector and Europol;251
6.5.3; 3. The cooperation between the private sector and LEAs under the Data Protection Reform Package;253
6.5.4; 4. The Albrecht & Droutsas reports on the cooperation between the private sector and LEAs;254
6.5.5; 5. Discussion on the application of the Data Protection Reform Package to the cooperation between the private sector and LEAs;255
6.5.6; 6. Conclusion;256
6.5.7; References;257
7; Contributors;260
8; European treaties and laws relevant for police cooperation (selection);266
