The Association of Chief Police Officers - Parliament

Bar Council –Written evidence• Similarly, there are cost implications of negotiating bilateral or multilateralagreements to replace measures such as the EAW, with individual Member States orgroups of Member States, for those measures into which we do not opt-back in, and• There is the question of the waste of costs already incurred, such as in preparationfor the long-planned SISII, in which the UK is said to have invested upwards of £39million to date.27. Another important area is police cooperation. Europol was set up under a Conventionwhich came into force in 1998, in order to improve cooperation between Member Statesseeking to combat serious transnational crime. It has a British Director. It is currentlysupporting 700 investigations into organised crime and terrorist networks in Europe; and theUK is actively involved in over 200 of those 700. The European Police College has beenestablished at Bramshill.28. Eurojust has had two British Directors to date. It operates to liaise between MemberStates often at very short notice, and in the most practical manner - such as the obtaining,overnight, of a certificate of conviction from a Member State, translated and in a formadmissible in the UK, where the previous conviction is relevant to bail, or to a bad characterapplication, or to sentence; or even to negate a defence of accident or mistaken ID.29. Further, the opt-out would potentially block the swift access currently enjoyed by UKpolice forces to information systems (both obtaining information and posting alerts forwanted people); and prevent them from taking part in Joint Investigation Teams such as thatwhich is currently investigating the murders of a British family near Annecy and the seriousinjury to one of the daughters.30. We are not in a position to quantify the cost, in financial terms, were the otherMember States to insist that the Police College should be moved, or were the British policeto have to fall back on mutual assistance measures in place of the more efficient systems justdescribed, but it is clear that they could be considerable. There would furthermore be aneffect on the efficient administration of trials. These measures were all brought into effect onthe basis that they were more effective than what was previously available. It is true thatplans are afoot to replace some of these key cooperation measures with directives in thecoming years, but there is no guarantee that the new measures will be in place in time toprevent the block-opt-out from affecting, even temporarily, these important operationalsystems.Question 3: What are the wider implications for the United Kingdom’s relationswith the European Union if the Government were to exercise the opt-out?31. The UK is the third most populous Member State in the EU and has been at theforefront of the development and implementation of international criminal law since theNuremberg Trials. Against that background, we believe that the opt-out would have practicaland diplomatic consequences for the UK, as well as a loss of influence.32. It is important to bear in mind that legal professionals in other Member States regardUK precedents, and instruments such as the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as thebenchmark in terms of securing defence rights. Lawyers abroad are sometimes surprisinglywell-informed of UK court decisions. UK lawyers have a very real influence in raisingstandards by contributing to training programmes, by participating in exchanges and40