Knowledgebase

Number of results: 52

The European Integrated Border Management Concept- SOURCE legal card

Document type: 
Legal Trend card
Authors / Institution: 
Publisher / Publication: 
CEPS for the SOURCE project
Abstract: 

The integration of border management at the European level is expressly foreseen in EU primary law.

 Article 77(2)(d) of the TFEU includes the progressive introduction of a European IBM system among the goals to be achieved by the EU policies on borders checks, asylum and migration

The European Integrated Border Management (EIBM) concept constitutes a part of the strategy that the EU has progressively elaborated “to compensate” for the abolition of internal borders within the Schengen areais. This concept is based on the assumption that strengthened operational and technical cooperation at the EU external borders is necessary for both facilitating the legitimate movement of goods and persons and for the detection, prevention and reduction of irregular migration and cross-border crime

The implementation and future development of the European IBM concept falls under the “shared responsibility or competences” between EU and Member States’ actors. It must go hand-to-hand with Lisbon Treaty standards, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and EU secondary (Schengen-related) legislation – and in particular the SBC

 

SOURCE Legal Card – Internal Border Controls in the Schengen Area

Document type: 
Legal Trend card
Authors / Institution: 
Publisher / Publication: 
CEPS for the SOURCE project
Abstract: 

The Schengen Borders Code (Regulation (EU) 2016/399) provides the legal framework for a common approach within the Schengen area for internal and external border controls.

The guiding principles of the Schengen Borders Code (SBC) are the absence of internal border controls and common rules on external border controls (Art. 1 SBC).

As of December 2018, 22 of the 28 EU Member States, excl. Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland, Romania and the UK, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, participate in the Schengen Area.

The absence of internal border controls espoused in the SBC entails that all persons may travel freely within the Schengen area without being subjected to border checks (Art. 22 SBC). Member States remain entitled to police checks (as long as they do not have an equivalent effect to border checks), security controls at sea- and airports, and checks relating to the legal obligation to carry a valid papers and document (Art. 23 SBC).

Under exceptional circumstances, the Schengen Borders Code provides for the possibility to temporarily reintroduce controls at the internal borders (Artt. 25-35 SBC). Internal border controls may be temporarily reintroduced only as a last resort (Art. 25(2) SBC), must comply with the criteria for their temporary reintroduction (in accordance with Artt. 26 and 30 SBC), and must follow the proper procedure and limitations (under Artt. 27-29 SBC).
 

Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism

Document type: 
Legislation
Publisher / Publication: 
Official Journal of the European Union
Abstract: 

Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 200

5/671/JHA

The European Union’s Policies on Counter-Terrorism Relevance: Coherence and Effectiveness

Document type: 
Report
Publisher / Publication: 
Directorate-General for Internal Policies - POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
Abstract: 

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee, identifies (counter-) terrorism trends,

threats and policies in the EU, focussing particularly on seven themes, including database access and interoperability, measures on border security, criminal justice and prevention of radicalisation. It also analyses the coherence and effectiveness of the counter-terrorism policy (architecture), and issues of cooperation, oversight and implementation, in particular of seven focus Member States: Belgium, Bulgaria, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Spain. Moreover, this study addresses future scenarios and formulates concrete policy options and recommendations.

EU and Member States’ policies and laws on persons suspected of terrorism-related crimes

Document type: 
Report
Publisher / Publication: 
Directorate-General for Internal Policies - POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS’ RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
Abstract: 

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justi

ce and Home Affairs (LIBE Committee), presents an overview of the legal and policy framework in the EU and 10 select EU Member States on persons suspected of terrorism-related crimes. The study analyses how Member States define suspects of terrorismrelated crimes, what measures are available to state authorities to prevent and investigate such crimes and how information on suspects of terrorism-related crimes is exchanged between Member States. The comparative analysis between the 10 Member States subject to this study, in combination with the examination of relevant EU policy and legislation, leads to the development of key conclusions and recommendations. 

News Frames and National Security - Covering Big Brother

Document type: 
Book
Authors / Institution: 
Publisher / Publication: 
Cambridge University Press
Abstract: 

Did media coverage contribute to Americans' tendency to favor national security over civil liberties following the 9/11 attacks?

How did news framing of terrorist threats support the expanding surveillance state revealed by Edward Snowden? Douglas M. McLeod and Dhavan V. Shah explore the power of news coverage to render targeted groups suspicious and to spur support for government surveillance. They argue that the tendency of journalists to frame stories around individual targets of surveillance - personifying the domestic threat - shapes citizens' judgments about tolerance and participation, leading them to limit the civil liberties of a range of groups under scrutiny and to support 'Big Brother'.
 

Big hover or big brother? Public attitudes about drone usage in domestic policing activities

Document type: 
Scientific publication
Publisher / Publication: 
Security Journal, 30 (4): 1027–1044
Abstract: 

Unmanned aerial systems (that is, UAS or drones) have been increasingly proposed and used by federal and state law enforcement agencies as an evolving technology for general surveillance, crime det

ection and criminal investigations. However, the use of UAS technology, in general, and within the particular context of domestic policing activities raises serious concerns about personal privacy and the greater intrusion of new forms of ‘big brother’ surveillance in people’s daily lives. On the basis of a national survey, the current study provides empirical evidence on public attitudes about UAS usage in various policing activities. Socio-demographic differences in the public support for drone usage in this context are also examined. Our general findings of context-specific variability in public support for UAS usage in policing operations are discussed in terms of their implications for developing public policy.

Transnational Organized Crime and European Union: Aspects and Problems

Document type: 
Scientific publication
Authors / Institution: 
Publisher / Publication: 
Chapter in: Human Rights in European Criminal Law, Stefano Ruggeri (ed.), Springer, pp 201-214
Abstract: 

The fight against criminal organizations and their ability to carry out illegal activities beyond the national borders has represented a “bridge head” in the European path towards the harmonization

of criminal laws in the member states. After considering the role played by the harmonization of criminal law in the European Union treaties, the study underlines how the difficulty in defining the concept of transnational organized crime could result in an excessive European intervention. In order to avoid such a risk, it is useful to refer to other relevant international sources, like the 2000 Palermo UN Convention, and also to recent European documents on the matter (in particular, a Resolution by the European Parliament of the 25th October 2011). The final part of the paper is dedicated to the necessity to reconsider the traditional guarantees in the new European dimension, especially in the light of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and their counterweight activity to prevent an unbalanced European intervention against organized crime.

How Civil Wars Help Explain Organized Crime—and How They Do Not

Document type: 
Scientific publication
Authors / Institution: 
Publisher / Publication: 
Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59 (8): 1517–1540
Abstract: 

Large-scale organized crime occupies a gray zone between ordinary crime and political violence.

The unprecedented scale of drug-related crime in Mexico has led to its description as an insurgency or even a civil war, a conceptual move that draws on recent studies that have associated civil war with large-scale criminality. By questioning both the “crime as civil war” and “civil war as crime” models, I argue that instead of folding the two phenomena, we should draw primarily from the micro-dynamics of civil war research program to identify areas of potentially productive cross-fertilization. I point to four such areas, namely, onset and termination, organization, combat and violence, and governance and territory. I conclude by sketching a theoretical and empirical agenda for the study of large-scale organized crime.

Juggling the Balance between Preventive Security and Human Rights in Europe

Document type: 
Scientific publication
Authors / Institution: 
Publisher / Publication: 
Security and Human Rights, 26 (2-4): 126-146
Abstract: 

Within the European Union (EU), security issues are increasingly framed as risks and threats that can be controlled by preventive measures.

The EU has established several agencies, legal instruments and databases to facilitate the prevention of crime, terrorism and irregular migration. This article takes stock of the way in which the EU seeks to balance the preventive security logic with its own human rights framework. While human rights can jointly be considered an evolving normative framework in the EU, there is a need to identify which human rights are at risk and how (non-) compliance ought to be monitored.The article states some concerns about equal access to human rights as well as the lack of a strong general oversight mechanism. Continued structural attention should be given to ex ante human-rights impact assessments and there needs to be more emphasis on regular external evaluations of human rights compliance ex post facto. In relation to the external action of the EU, the EU must practice what it preaches and needs to reflect critically on the necessity and proportionality of precautionary security measures.

Pages

Go to top