President. – The next item is the debate on the report (A5-0126/2000) by Mrs Sörensen, on behalf of the Committee on Citizens’ Rights and Freedoms, Justice and Home Affairs, on the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on crime victims in the European Union – Reflections on standards and actions [COM(1999) 349 - C5-0119/1999 - 1999/2122(COS)]

  Sörensen (Verts/ALE), rapporteur. – (NL) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in this communication, the Commission has certainly demonstrated its willingness to make a tangible contribution towards improving the position of crime victims. It points out that within an area of freedom, justice and security within the European Union, citizens must be entitled to effective legal protection.

The Commission would also like to launch a discussion on the treatment of victims and would like to see measures taken to improve their plight. The Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs feels that a number of the proposed measures are too dependent on the goodwill of individual Member States and it calls for rules at a European level. Why is this so necessary? There are countless examples known to us of how victims have been treated in recent years: child abductions, in which case the parents and relatives are also the victims, victims of terrorist attacks, victims of organised crime, break-ins, robberies and the like, stalking, not to mention intimidation. But victims must not suffer twice: firstly from a crime and secondly from the system. There is a need for clarity concerning the rights of victims and for transparency concerning their status.

The measures proposed in the Commission communication appear to be geared exclusively towards victims from one Member State in another Member State, or third country victims legally resident in one Member State in another Member State. However, the package of measures should also take account of Member State victims in third countries and third country citizens illegally resident in a Member State.

The status of a victim should not have any effect on his rights or on the possibility of acquiring such rights. In the context of the enlargement of the European Union, particular attention should be paid to the treatment of victims from the candidate countries.

Since they are concerned with both civil and criminal procedures, the Treaties provide the European Union with instruments for increasing the protection of crime victims on its territory.

It is regrettable, however, that the unanimity rule currently applies. The scoreboard submitted by the Commission for reviewing progress in implementing the area of liberty, security and justice should be modified in such a way as to guarantee and speed up the legislative follow-up to the present directive. It is disturbing, however, that the measures concerned with aid to crime victims are not intended to come into effect until 2004 in this scoreboard. We cannot let victims wait for that long. By providing measures in 2001, victims will at long last be able to look forward to fair treatment. After all, treating victims with understanding and dignity also plays a preventive role. The proper treatment of victims will help destigmatise them and enhance their emblematic role.

When granting aid to victims, it is important not only to provide financial and legal assistance, but also to take measures first of all in the field of anonymity, privacy and safety of the victims, as well as in connection with the religious and cultural aspects, and to provide medical, psychological and social assistance. In addition, it is important to recognise the family of the victim as fellow victims and as witnesses, and to recognise the right to be assisted by an interpreter and to be questioned in the mother tongue. A special system should also be set up for the legal, psychological and physical protection of victims of domestic violence, stalking and genital mutilation.

In particular, additional measures are required for minors. For this purpose, specially equipped rooms need to be provided where the questioning of minors can be registered on video, so that they are not obliged to be confronted more than once with a traumatic experience. It must immediately be possible to provide the victim with material, medical, psychological and social assistance which is free of charge at the time of being offered.

Victims should also be informed of the availability of the various forms of assistance. It is extremely important that, depending on the nature of the crime, specialist assistance is provided. In this context, it is important to do away with a number of prejudices: some forms of crime are regarded more seriously in some countries than in others.

There is also evidence of a discriminatory response to victims reporting crime. Member States should be obliged to set up special police units for crime victims.

I would also draw attention to the importance of a legal basis for, and harmonisation of, the measures for protecting victims. The study carried out under the Grotius programme by An Wergens provides the requisite basic information. The useful experience available in respect of existing measures in certain Member States can play an important role in harmonising measures or drawing up a common package of measures. An initiative of this kind is a first step towards crime prevention. But given the fact that organised, cross-border crime is on the increase, the initiative should culminate in a common prevention programme on a European and international scale.

Finally, pending the introduction of a harmonised instrument for cross-border protection of victims, the Member States themselves and the candidate countries, in conjunction with NGOs, will need to enhance the protection of victims. It is also important to assess safety aspects in urban development and spatial planning in order to prevent crimes.

  Cederschiöld (PPE-DE), draftsperson of the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market. – (SV) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentleman who have been so patient.

Talking about strengthening the position of crime victims is like relating a story with a happy ending. From the beginning, we met palpable resistance from many quarters, but now most people agree that this is something important and commendable. This applies to all the European institutions.

We need to focus upon the victims’ perspective and upon strengthening their rights in the Union. People who make use of their freedom of movement should not have to be exposed to crime. If they do in fact become crime victims, they should at least not have to suffer twice and end up in a worse situation than citizens of the country concerned who are themselves crime victims. This applies irrespective of what the particular crime might be. The position of crime victims ought therefore to be strengthened on a number of levels.

One can hardly talk about strengthening the position of crime victims without also talking about crime prevention measures. In November 1997, Parliament took the initiative and requested an action plan regarding preventive measures. An action plan of this kind was adopted by the Council in December 1998. These questions were highlighted again in Tampere in the autumn of 1999. We have embarked upon a new process.

The best way of helping crime victims is, in fact, to ensure that no crimes are committed, but that cannot always be done in practice. The best way of preventing crime is to disseminate information. To be able to devise an effective crime prevention strategy, we need in fact to know what we are talking about. For example, there are still no definitions of the concepts of crime victim and organised crime.

In addition to introducing crime prevention measures, the position of crime victims must be strengthened in more concrete terms once crimes have actually been committed. It is partly a question of making people more aware. Crime victims ought also to know to what rights and possible forms of aid they are in fact entitled. Most Member States have services which provide crime victims with some form of first aid. Travellers may, sometimes more than the local population, require various forms of specific aid. This may take the form of special measures including help with language and translations, as well as psychological help. The police, social services and non-governmental organisations of various kinds will, of course, be involved in providing these forms of aid. European cooperation has, in actual fact, already been devised and is in the process of development. In particular, the European Forum for Victim Services has developed sound guidelines relating to the position of crime victims.

The Commission’s proposal involves introducing minimum standards for receiving crime victims with a view to being able to provide them with information and support where necessary. This is excellent. The police will play an important role because they are the point of first contact, and special training is often required in this connection. It is difficult for foreign crime victims to follow the legal proceedings at a distance, which is why special measures are also required to guarantee the legal position of foreign crime victims.

Discussion of this issue began in the Commission during the last session under Commissioner Gradin of Sweden. The issue will be taken up again under the Swedish Presidency. In actual fact, this is, in a way, a story with a happy ending because there is quite a lot of agreement as to the objectives. Thinking European is often the same as moving Europe forward. In this case, we have common interests across party divides and national frontiers. There ought, therefore, to be good opportunities to think European.

I therefore welcome the Commission’s communication and I want quite especially, of course, to thank Mrs Sörensen for her work on this report – a report we fully support. We shall then wish to urge the Commission to come back with directives. We hope for concrete action in the future. The necessary conditions are broadly present.

  Coelho (PPE-DE). – (PT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, when these issues are addressed, the public authorities are usually more concerned about the aspects of dissuasion and security, crime prevention, approval of penal frameworks and action by police forces and the legal apparatus. However, it is also essential that we consider the people most affected by crime: its victims. Whoever they are, we cannot allow them to become a double victim, firstly of the crime and then of the system. Adequate protection must be guaranteed for crime victims within our Union and it is essential that equal treatment for these victims is also guaranteed, whether in court or before the authorities. Active means of support must also be developed. The personal dignity of the victim must be respected and their safety, privacy and family must be protected given that this Union which we are gradually building is based on respect for rights and freedoms, guarantees of safety for people and their property and effective legal protection. In other words, this is a Union based on the values which characterise contemporary democracies.

We therefore welcome the Commission’s initiative which is clearly compatible with the effort to create an area of freedom, security and justice. It is essential that there are minimum rules on the protection of crime victims which ensure, throughout the European Union, an adequate level of legal assistance in cross-border proceedings. This is particularly important on issues such as access to justice, protection and effective application of the rights of victims in proceedings or their right to participate, receive the necessary aid, obtain and provide information, understand and be understood and so on. Victims must also have the right to compensation for damages, including court costs.

  Evans, Robert (PSE). – Mr President, I should like to congratulate the rapporteur on this report. It is an important area and she has rightly drawn attention to it. It refers to the new powers of the Community over the last few years: rights of asylum, immigration and general cooperation in civil matters. It is therefore crucial that we use these powers to improve the position of victims of crime.

At the time of the crime, especially personal, physical or violent crime, many victims, if not all, will be vulnerable, distressed, upset, probably angry, and desperately in need of support. As the rapporteur has said, they do not need to become victims again. Nor do they need to feel that they are being branded almost as criminals themselves. We need to ensure – and this report goes a long way towards it – that the procedures do not negate the situation or make it worse, but rather, that they support and assist the victims.

The rapporteur has said that we also need to make certain that safeguards are in place so that there is no intrusion into the privacy of victims. We must in particular draw attention to intrusion or possible intrusion by the press. I am particularly pleased that this report includes support in the language or dialect of the victim of crime because sometimes that is an area that is overlooked.

Likewise the necessity for training of police officers and others in authority. Ethnic minorities, very often women, children – those who sometimes find the system difficult – will be the ones who are most at risk in this sort of situation. Those who perhaps are in fear of authority are especially vulnerable.

The PSE Group is pleased to support this report and to congratulate the rapporteur. However, there will be no surprise that we will reject those amendments that have been put down in the name of certain members of the TDI Group. Those amendments do not improve the report; rather they are a crude attempt to add the biased, distorted and racist sentiment of the signatories concerned. I congratulate the rapporteur on her work. I congratulate the Commission on bringing this forward, and I wish it every success in the future.

  Watson (ELDR). – Mr President, on behalf of the Liberal Group, I should like to welcome this report and to thank Mrs Sörensen for her excellent work in drawing up such an important document.

I welcome the underlying Commission communication, but I would say, on behalf of my Group, that we regret that this communication was not much stronger. It is quite clear that the Treaties provide the Union with the instruments that are necessary to strengthen protection of the victims of crime. I think, for example, of some of the conclusions of the Wergens report, and we would have expected more from the Commission than proposals for greater dialogue and the exchange of best practice. We need clear measures to help victims with access to assistance, justice and compensation.

However, it must be said that if we feel the Commission could do more, the biggest problem is by far the Member States. It seems to us incredible that seven Member States have still not ratified the 1983 Convention on compensation for victims of violent crime and that standards of justice are still so low in so many Member States. Let me give just one brief example from my own constituency. Mr Pike, a lorry driver in my constituency, was recently assaulted by his employer in the Netherlands. Mr Pike is not a wealthy man and the cost of legal redress is high. He does not have access to legal aid in Britain because he has to employ a lawyer in the Netherlands to help him. He does not have access to legal aid in the Netherlands. He is unable to secure any compensation or, indeed, any justice for the injuries he has suffered.

Unless we are able as a Union to help in relatively clear and simple situations like this, our citizens will not have confidence in the single market and will not feel part of the European Union. I hope that we can take up some of the ideas put forward in this report to improve their situation.

  Ortuondo Larrea (Verts/ALE). – (ES) Mr President, I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteur, Patsy Sörensen, for the care and accuracy of her report.

On the other hand, I would like to focus my attention on the presentation of various amendments to the draft text which include people affected by terrorism as the victims of crime in the EU.

I completely agree with this, as well as the fact that certain groups use violence to try to impose their ideals. What I believe, Mr President, is that when we speak of imposing ideals, and of victims, we should not only refer to terrorist organisations, of which there are too many and which must cease to exist in a democracy such as the one we want for Europe.

In this respect, we must also reject and condemn the impositions and violence sometimes exercised by bodies and apparatus of the states, as in the case of GAL and other previous cases in Spain.

Democratic justice must apply to all without exception, and moral reparations and material, medical, psychological and social aid etc. must reach all the victims of terrorism without exception, including, of course, the victims of the above-mentioned state-sponsored groups.

Only in this way, acting fairly, will we achieve a Europe which lives in peace and prosperity, which is the founding aim of our Community and I believe that this is still our greatest aspiration.

  Matikainen-Kallström (PPE-DE). – (FI) Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur for her valuable work. The Commission has tackled a very important issue in its communiqué. The question of more effective help for the victims of crime will not be solved merely by improved legislation. We can only make permanent improvements through combined, broad-based dialogue on the part of NGOs and the national authorities. Compared to the authorities, NGOs often, in practice, have more flexible and versatile approaches to problem solving. For example, Internet-based info-banks and service telephones provided through voluntary work could be developed in parallel with the services provided by the authorities. The rigid nature of the courts and especially the high costs involved often prevent victims of crime from discovering their rights. The situation is in untenable conflict with EU principles of the rule of law. People have to enjoy true justice without having to pay for it. The minimum level of legal protection in the Member States of the EU must not be allowed to slip to that which exists in the United States.

The EU and its Member States must also ensure that the victims of crime do not have to suffer twice over for the wrong done them. In particular, when it comes to organised crime, many victims forsake the opportunity to go to trial as a result of pressures or for fear of vengeance. EU Member States must develop more effective cooperation among the authorities in post-trial situations, for example, in the areas of plaintiff and witness protection programmes. The added value of Europol in this process must also be investigated carefully.

  Cerdeira Morterero (PSE). – (ES) Mr President, I welcome the Commission communication on victims of crime in the European Union, since it studies the process of creating common policies, as well as greater cooperation between the Member States at a time when we are all aware, including this Parliament of course, of the need for this type of communitisation.

Bearing in mind the enormous number of citizens of the European Union who suffer as a result of crime and, in particular, terrorism, I welcome this report which we are debating today since it contains certain points which, in my view, are particularly noteworthy.

One is the sensitivity it shows by specifically highlighting the fact that there are certain social groups – women, children, immigrants, homosexuals – who are more vulnerable than the rest of the population, as well as the fact that there are also certain sectors who, ignoring the most basic democratic principles, prefer to use violence to impose their objectives.

We must start by achieving a common definition of the concept of the victim to include families and dependants, since they also suffer the consequences of crime.

On the other hand, I also fully share the opinion that everybody resident in the Union should be clearly included, so that they may be subject to all the different measures that we are debating today, regardless of their status.

Nevertheless, it is regrettable that the adoption of the proposed measures is to be postponed until 2004, since I believe that they must be adopted as soon as possible.

From another point of view and bearing in mind the ever increasing importance and influence of the media in our society, special attention should be paid to the way in which the media deal with the reality of these people, which is not always respectful of individual rights, above all when we are talking about minors, whether they be victims or delinquents.

With regard to these people it is also necessary to apply certain measures so that they can rebuild their lives correctly, not only from an economic point of view, but also through psychological, legal, medical and social assistance. To sum up, they should be guaranteed full protection and, for that purpose, I am convinced that it is absolutely essential to cooperate with the NGOs and associations in the sector in every Member State.

I must finally stress my deep concern about the need to pay due attention to the victims of terrorism, since these are people who suffer from a very serious and specific form of crime which, unfortunately, does not only take place in my country, Spain, and which threatens democratic coexistence and freedom.

  Palacio Vallelersundi (PPE-DE). – (ES) Mr President, as the Commission says in the introduction to its communication, we cannot seriously speak of a citizens’ Europe without dealing with the rights of victims. I would like to express my agreement with what has been said by other speakers about the hope that the Commission will be more ambitious than it has been in this communication. I also urge it be ambitious.

Please allow me, Mr President, to focus on the problem of the victims of terrorism. I must begin by expressing my regret at the fact that a certain Member who spoke previously gave the impression that he reluctantly accepted the importance of the victims of terrorism, and then straight away focussed on other issues.

However, I would like to highlight the importance of this report and Mrs Sörensen’s cooperation. This is a balanced report which has been sensitive to the victims of terrorism, because if there are three groups of victims which must receive our special attention, they are, as the Treaty says, victims of trafficking in human beings, victims of crime against children and victims of terrorism.

I must therefore congratulate Mrs Sörensen, since she has hit the nail on the head by stressing that certain groups need specific attention. We must not forget that complete attention must involve psychological attention. This complete attention must also involve the consideration of family relatives as also being victims. This is especially true in the case of terrorism.

Therefore, Mr President, I believe that this is a step which we hope will encourage the Commission to implement, with the Treaty of Amsterdam in their hands, more ambitious measures in this area. This, as the Commission says very clearly, is an obligation for all of us if we want to be able to speak proudly of a citizens’ Europe.

  Vitorino, Commission. – (FR) Mr President, first of all, I should like to mention, as a starting point, Mrs Cederschiöld’s speech. It has traditionally been felt that victim protection is primarily a matter of compensating victims. It should be noted that the Commission communication differs from this in offering a broader approach to issues of the European level protection of victims of crime. I must stress the role played by my predecessor, Anita Gradin, in initiating debate on these issues within the Commission and the European institutions.

This broader approach takes the view that the issue of victims also necessitates work on prevention, information, practical help and the status of victims in criminal trials. I should like to stress the fact that the Tampere European Council endorsed this broader approach. That is why it declared that it is in the Union’s interest to adopt minimum standards for the protection of victims of crime, specifically with regard to access to justice for these victims and their right to compensation, including the reimbursement of their legal fees. This issue must not only be addressed at European level, but the Tampere Council also recommends establishing national programmes to finance both public and non-governmental measures for the assistance and protection of victims.

The Commission is therefore delighted at Mrs Sörensen’s excellent report, on which I congratulate her. We are fully prepared to work in accordance with the broad general guidelines presented in this report. The Commission agrees fully with the approach for the need to develop victim support networks, particularly language support. By the same token, we share the rapporteur’s concern at the special attention that needs to be paid to particular categories of victim, such as foreign nationals, minors, and victims of sexual violence, the trade in human beings or terrorist acts. It is equally important that we improve the training of staff likely to come into contact with such victims.

Lastly, Parliament quite rightly stresses the importance of protecting the privacy and anonymity of victims and witnesses, specifically where the media is concerned. This is a sensitive issue, but one we must support, as it is crucial to safeguarding the dignity of victims of crime.

What are we currently doing? So far the Commission has collected the views of non-governmental organisations, and we feel that it is very important to hear Parliament’s opinion too. We are paying close attention to a proposal for a framework decision on the protection of victims in Europe, which is already under consideration by the Council. This proposal was submitted by the Portuguese Presidency and we agree with its broad philosophy. This proposal for a framework decision, which, as you know, is a legislative instrument specific to the third pillar, provides for the development of all victim support mechanisms and for making it easier for crime victims located far afield to take part in trials by setting up systems for giving evidence in either written or video form. The proposal also provides for separate waiting rooms for victims to be established, enabling them to avoid, as much as possible, meeting the perpetrator of the crime against them. We are already, however, working at a level beyond this framework-decision.

As Mrs Sörensen pointed out, moreover, the Commission is anxious to make use of all courses of action provided for in the Treaty to provide better protection for victims, and here I am referring to Articles 65 and 66 of the Treaty establishing the European Community and to Article 31(E) of the Treaty on European Union.

Indeed, it is the Commission’s view that the measures dealing with the provision of victim support, that is, the standards which the support services must meet, the creation of victim support helplines, and all the issues to do with information and with linguistic support for victims of crime, should be regulated by instruments that come under the first pillar.

The same applies to the intervention mechanisms for possible compensation funds with regard to the joint regulations, the conditions of eligibility for the funds, the possibility of advances, and coordination with insurance schemes and between national victim compensation funds.

We are already establishing contacts with the future Swedish Presidency, which, this autumn, with support from the Grotius programme, will be organising a special seminar specifically on compensation mechanisms. Similarly, in a very practical move, the Commission has already decided to carry out a study into the feasibility of establishing a European victim aid system in the form of a free multilingual telephone helpline.

Many Members have expressed regret that the Commission’s scoreboard only provides for measures on aid for crime victims from 2004 onwards. As I have already had occasion to explain several times, 2004 is the cut off date to which we are bound under the 1998 Vienna action plan. Nevertheless, as you see, the Commission is already committed to working without delay on this issue, which is so important for the people of Europe, and I hope that we will have achieved tangible results even before 2004.

  President. – Thank you, Commissioner. I should just like to say, if you do not mind, that I could be tempted to take bets on what language you use to address Parliament.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place tomorrow, at 12 noon.