|
Frequently Asked Questions
 How is the European Arrest Warrant intended to work?
What happens next?
What are the 32 named offences on the European Arrest Warrant?
Do these crimes pose any problems under English and Scottish law?
Are there grounds for being concerned about the potential misuse of arrest warrant?
Is there widespread concern?
What are the EU's intentions?
What is the British Government's position?
What is the UK Independence Party's position?
What can you do to oppose the European Arrest Warrant?
Summary
Q: How is the European Arrest Warrant intended to work?
A.
Any person in any EU member country may be subject to an EU arrest Warrant.
A court official in any EU member state may issue an arrest warrant to the courts within the member state in which the accused person happens to be, and the warrant must be executed within one month.
- The warrant does not have to provide prima facie evidence of the crime concerned but merely has to claim that the suspected person in required for investigation for any one of the 32 named category of offences covered by the warrant.
- The warrant does not need to detail the substance of the case against the accused.
- There is no need for an hearing in an English and Scottish court to test even the prima facie evidence of the case.
- All that required is that the extraditing magistrate should tick one of the 32 allerged offences and state, "time of offence, degree of participation, and other circumstances".
- The warrant is also required the" confiscation and handing over of property that made required as evidence", and, "the seizure and handling over of property acquired by the requested person as a result of the offence, if known".
- Provided that the correct information has been filled in and the relevant boxes have been ticked on the extradition form then the British legal authorities will be obliged to hand over the accused person for extradition.
- The British Home Secretary may appoint "appropriate persons" to execute arrest warrant. These might be members of Europol, the new European police force. Europol members have immunity from prosecution for any actions they take in the course of their duties. Should they to mistreat or torture prisoners they will be immune from subsequent prosecution. Europol will effectively be above the law.
Q: What happens next?
A.Once arrested the accused person will be sent to the country that issued the arrest warrant and will be subject to the judicial procedures of that country.
The full details of how the accused person will be treated in each EU country are unknown by anyone in Britain. However no member of the European Union, except the UK and Ireland, has Habeas Corpus or trial jury.
Prisoners may be held on 'pre-trial detention 'for periods of time much longer than those allowed under English law.
Q: What are the 32 named offences on the European Arrest Warrant?
These are: 1. Participating in a criminal organisation.
2. Terrorism.
3. Trafficking in human beings.
4. The sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.
5. Illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
6. Illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives.
7. Corruption.
8. Fraud(including against the European Union's financial interest).
9. Laundering of the proceeds of crime.
10. Counterfeiting currency, including the euro.
11. Computer related crime.
12. Environmental crime.
13. Facilitation and unauthorised entry and residence.
14. Murder, grievous bodily harm.
15. Illicit trade in human organs and tissue.
16. Kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage taking.
17. Racism and Xenophobia.
18. Organised arm robbery.
19. Illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art.
20. Swindling.
21. Racketeering and extortion.
22. Counterfeiting and piracy of products.
23. Forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein.
24. Forgery of means of payment.
25. Illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters.
26. Illicit trafficking of nuclear or radioactive materials.
27. Trafficking in stolen vehicles.
28. Rape.
29. Arson.
30. Crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal.
31. Unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships.
32. Sabotage
Q: Do these crimes pose any problems under English and Scottish law?
A: Some offences such as murder, robbery arson and kidnapping are obviously understood as offences in any country but many of the 32 crimes listed above do not correspond to defined offences under the UK law.
UK definition for all the 32 offences have not yet been established. For example, the offence of 'Swindling' is not a crime in the UK. In British usage the word defines a general description of a disreputable activity but lacks the precision necessary for the definition of a criminal offence.
Consider also "racism and xenophobia". Britain has laws that prohibit specific manifestations of racism, e.g. incitement to racial hatred, but is that the same as racism and xenophobia? Corruption has no legal definition in English law; a specific offence would have to be defined. In effect this does not matter because it will only be for the country requiring extradition to decide whether it is appropriate to put someone in trial for this allerged offences. The UK legal authorities will not have the power to stop extradition provided that the extradition form has been correctly filled in.
Q: Are there grounds for being concerned about the potential misuse of arrest warrant?
A.Obviously there are. There are a number of practical concerns. Continental European legal systems often lack the clear distinction between the investigation and prosecution of crime.
A judicial figure, the investigating magistrate, has change of the investigation. He may also be the person who issues the arrest warrant as part of the investigation, and the person who interrogates, or cause to be interrogated, the accused person. He may also be responsible for deciding how long the accused is held in custody awaiting trial. It is well known that many of those accused crimes on the continent are held in detention for considerable periods of time before any charges are laid.
The biggest cause for concern is that when the EU has developed into the European Government, as it intends to do, the EAW will be used as an instrument of oppression against dissidents. The combination of police immunity from the law and the power to arrest and hold are key requirements in any dictatorship.
Q:Is there widespread concern?
A:Yes there is. Following an outcry in their ranks the House of Lords forced the EU arrest warrant to be removed from the Anti-Terrorism, Crime Security Bill introduced by the government in the aftermath of 11th September, when they tried to rush through. The arrest warrant has been the subject of strong criticism by UK human rights groups, the UK legal profession, and by other EU countries.
Q: What are the EU's intentions? A: Also proposed at Tampere was introduction of a 'European Penal Code' (Corpus Juris) to apply in all member states. Key to this is EAW which would be supported by a European Public Prosecutor with representatives in all member states.
There is no provision for trial jury, or Habeas Corpus whereby an accused person must be brought to trial within a limited, specified time. The EU wants the right to arrest and imprison EU citizens on suspicion alone, and to hold them in custody for as long as it wishes
Q: What is the British Government's position?
A:The EAW is so-called European Union legislation and is supposed to automatically over-ride English and Scottish law.
The AEW was an instruction produced by the European Council. The European Council consists of the heads of state/government of EU member nations who meet within the Council at least twice a year.
The president of the EU Commission also attends the meetings as do various foreign ministers, and one of the commissioners. Details of what is discussed in the Council are secret and are not published. Mr. Blair was party to the instruction and Mr. Blunkett, the home secretary, has signed up to the EAW supposedly committing Britain to it and ignored a 'Scrutiny Reserve' place on it by House of Lords that would have given time for debate.
Under the British constitution the government is answerable to Parliament and they should not have committed Britain without Parliamentary approval. Parliament still retains the power to reject the legislation enforcing the EAW in Britain.
Q: What is the UK Independence Party's position?
A: UKIP totally opposes this legislation and demands that Parliament reject the EAW. UKIP members of the European Parliament voted against this legislation in protest.
Q: What can you do to oppose the European Arrest Warrant?
A: 1. Write to your MP enclosing a copy of this pamphlet. Ask him or her if they support the EAW. If they support the EAW then ask them if they can disprove any facts here. Tell them to vote against the bill when it comes before Parliament.
2. Join, support, or vote for, the UK Independence Party. UKIP is the only political party pledged to take Britain out the European Union and restore her rightful status as an independent, democratic, self-governing country.
Q: Summary
A:
- The British Labour government has unconstitutionally committed itself to driving the European Arrest Warrant legislation through Parliament without proper debate. Because the EU Justice &Home Affairs Council formally adopted the EAW then Parliament will be told it must transpose it into English law (and likewise Scottish law) or be in contravention of EU Treaty.
- If this principle is accepted then it stands the British constitution on its head. It would mean that when representatives of the British government agree with their fellows in the EU then Parliament must enact those measures they have decided on even if parliament is against them. Under our constitution it is Parliament, elected by the people, that tells the Government what to do, and not the other way around.
- The 'Scrutiny Reserve 'of parliament on the EAW must be respected and the government must be taken to task for having flouted it and gone ahead and signed up in Brussels despite it. Parliament must re-assert its constitutional prerogatives and reject the EAW out of hand; otherwise it will be declaring itself henceforward a vassal of the European Union.
- If it become law then the safeguards established centuries ago to protect the ordinary citizen against arbitrary arrest and detention will be abolished.
The system is open to obvious abuse and manipulation in that it could be used for political purposes against anyone the European Union decides it wishes to imprison on trumped-up charges. The loosely worded provisions of some criminal offences listed means that the arrest warrant could become the instrument of oppression by the EU against political dissidents.
What can you do to oppose the European Arrest Warrant?
1. Write to your MP enclosing a copy of this pamphlet. Ask him or her if they support the EAW. If they support the EAW then ask them if they can disprove any facts here. Tell them to vote against the bill when it comes before Parliament.
2. Join, support, or vote for, the UK Independence Party. UKIP is the only political party pledged to take Britain out the European Union and restore her rightful status as an independent, democratic, self-governing country.
|
