Nationwide alarm at EAW opt-out plan
Legal professions across the UK have united to call for full public consultation on the government’s proposal to opt out of more than 130 EU criminal justice measures, including the European arrest warrant (EAW).
The call follows reports that the prime minister David Cameron indicated during a trade visit to Brazil last week that the government intends to exercise its opt-out powers before the end of the year. The Law Societies of England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland as well as the Bar Council have warned that the decision will hamper the fight against cross-border crime and threaten law and order in the UK.
The government has until the end of May 2014 to notify the European Commission (pictured) of any decision to opt out of all of the police and criminal justice measures adopted under the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht.
Law Society of England and Wales president Lucy Scott-Moncrieff said that a decision to remove the UK from so many criminal justice ministers, most of which are procedural and promote practical co-operation between member states in fighting cross-border crime, could have far-reaching implications. She urged the government to engage with practitioners to seek their views in an open and transparent consultation process.
Bar chief Michael Todd QC said: ‘Those who advocate an opt out of EU criminal justice measures assume that it will remove the UK from the scope of EU criminal justice, and that it may save money.’ But he said the UK’s opt-out can relate only to measures established before the Treaty of Lisbon came into force in 2009, which would be a ‘recipe for confusion and greater costs’.
Todd warned: ‘The loss of these measures, including the EAW, would directly threaten law and order in the UK.’
He said that the practical considerations involved in the fight against cross-border crime would mean that the UK would almost certainly need to seek to opt back into them. Todd said that there is ‘more than enough time’ for a full public consultation to assess the impact of the changes properly and urged the government to do so.
Austin Lafferty, president of the Law Society of Scotland, said: ‘A wholesale opt-out could have very serious consequences in fighting cross-border crime from both a practical and cost perspective.’ He warned that even if the UK is able to opt back in to some measures, it would cause ‘confusion, complexity and cost’.
He said: ‘This important decision should not be seen as a totemic pro/anti-EU issue. It should be taken on its own merits, based on practical experience and objective information.’
Law Society of Northern Ireland president Imelda McMillan added: ‘Failure of government to consult publicly on this very important decision would be a serious oversight and would raise significant concerns in the legal profession – at home and across Europe.’
Comments
On the basis that the great
On the basis that the great and the good of the legal profession have made these announcements from on high without an iota of consultation with their members, we can assume that the Government has for once got things spot on...
Announced last week
'The Prime Minister indicated last week' and all of a sudden legal professions across the UK have united for a call on public consultation. WOW the LS moves fast in getting firms opinions from far and wide. The LS has become an organization that represents itself and an exclusive elite which in no way represents the members anymore. How can they make such a sweeping statement in such a short amount of time with no consultation??
Possibly the President might
Possibly the President might get the Law Society to engage with practitioners before recommending that the Government do so. She speaks merely for herself and the governing clique.
"Nationwide alarm" -- what nonsense
Actually, the only people who are alarmed about this are a bunch of euro-prostituting right-on leftie lawyers and the Law Society, which is representative of really not very much at all. The rest of us are rather relieved that the British Government has decided that European Arrest Warrants issued in the oh-so-rigorous courts of, say, Bulgaria, Latvia or Romania will not be mindlessly and automatically enforced here.
EAW
I hope this means, I will not be trying in vain to prevent a client from being extradited to Poland (all at the tax payers expense), for defaulting on the hire purchase of a television.
EU
As soon as I read that the EU had ruled that Europeans who move house from Europe to England -- and leave their children in their home countries -- are entitled to child benefits for their children still living in Europe, I knew that there could only be one answer: U K I P.
EAW OPT-OUT PLAN
Well done for David Cameron. Who is the president of the Law Society to speak on behalf of the profession when she has not consulted anyone. That is "European democacy" for you.
EAW Opt Out
As someone who does many Extradation Cases ( most of which are resolved on the first appearance ) I am staggered by the intention to opt out - we returned 965 Poles to Poland alone last year - ( acorrding to Press statistics) all who had run away from Prison sentences or trials.
If we scrap thsi we may find that the UK is regarded as a " safe haven" for all of Europes Criminals or others on the run .
Why would we want this ? I cannot believe that something will replace it and theat " something" may in fact be more complex ( good for Extradition lawyers but hardly for Society as a whole ).
European Arrest Warrants
The LAw Societies and the Bar Council are over reacting. There is a serious problem with the EAWs and it it quite right that these should be looked at. Fast Track extradition is capable of causing huge injustice and the EAWs are capable of just that. It is not the case that withdtawal will create law and order problems in the UK. Well done DAvid Cameron.
Perhaps Madam President
Perhaps Madam President should inundate us all with consultations on every single thing that happens in the world that might affect Solicitors, and then you can all say 'why is she wasting my time, isn't this what we pay her to decide'...
Not a chance, old chap! They
Not a chance, old chap! They don't want to hear our views, let alone take notice of them. They only want the money and status.
AEW
Perhaps if the EAW had not been brought into disrepute by its use for the most trivial of crimes & when we had been told it was to fight terrorism perhaps the government wouldn't now be looking at an opt-out
I also would like them too reconsider the one-way extradition process with America
opting out
Perhaps solicitors could opt out of complying with the increasingly silly but toxic requirements of the SRA?
Madam President should by her actions lead and inspire others to act honourably because she is an honourable woman?
Law Society Comment
The aim of the Law Society’s intervention on this issue is indeed to provide an opportunity for the membership – and the public – to be properly consulted on the policy and practical implications of an opt-out, which does not seem to be the current intention of the government. The issue is not only about the European Arrest Warrant but over 130 measures which the UK would have to opt-out of as a block. It is not clear what the practical implications would be of exercising a block opt-out and then opting back into a significant number of measures – including quite possibly the EAW – and at what cost. These issues are complex and the importance of a consultation with the profession and other key stakeholders is clear. We will host an open event on 29 November to facilitate discussion.
The press release is here.
Event: http://services.lawsociety.org.uk/events/node/56160
Mickaël Laurans, Head of the Joint Brussels Office of the Law Societies