The Association of Chief Police Officers - Parliament

Bar Council –Written evidencerespecting their coherence”69. In practice therefore, the UK’s participation is likely to be facilitated save where theopt-in decisions appears inconsistent or lacking in coherence.Question 14: What form could cooperation with other Member States take ifthe United Kingdom opts-out of the PCJ measures? Would it be practical, ordesirable, to rely upon alternative international agreements including Council ofEurope Conventions?70. The Bar Council refers again to the comprehensive analysis of the possible optionsavailable to the UK set out in the CELs paper, referred to elsewhere in this paper and linkedto footnote I above. We would thus wish to add only a few summary comments.71. For reasons already stated, the Bar Council takes the view that it would be neitherpractical nor desirable for the UK to rely upon alternative international agreements. Thestarting point is a simple one – if those agreements had been sufficient, there would havebeen no need to adopt the EU measures replacing them in the first place.72. Bilateral provisions are cumbersome, subject to local variation, and often inconsistent;all of which inevitably causes delay and confusion. The great advantage of the EU-widemeasures (and this is an advantage that should become ever more apparent as the measuresbecome familiar) is that they provide a single framework governing all 27 Member States. Allparties (and this is especially true for accession states) can become accustomed to a singledocument, or a single procedure, and set of time limits and apply them across the board.The result is an infinitely more efficient system.73. It is worth remembering that the EU’s increasing competence in the justice area wasintended to meet the needs of an EU population that increasingly exercises its InternalMarket freedoms, through cross-border travel for work or pleasure; cross-borderpurchasing of goods and services etc. That the EU’s borders have become porous tocriminals as well as to law-abiding citizens is a reality that the UK is better able to face incooperation with its EU partners, than alone. Equally, citizens who are caught up in thecriminal justice system of another Member State, whether through fault of their own orotherwise, reasonably expect to be able to rely on certain minimum rights and minimumlevels of protection. It is our view that alternative international agreements, which bindother states that are not EU Member States, cannot deliver the level of mutual recognitionand cooperation that is necessary if UK citizens are to avail of all the benefits of EUmembership.Question 15: Is Article 276 TFEU, which states that the Court of Justice has nojurisdiction to review the validity or proportionality of operations regarding themaintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security, relevantto the decision on the opt-out?74. This provision should give considerable reassurance to those concerned by the roleof CJEU in criminal justice. It provides express legal force to some of the points alreadymade in answer to Question 8. It merely reflects the current exception to EU competencein article 72 TFEU, contained within part V TFEU on the area of freedom, security and48