The Bruges Group spearheaded the intellectual battle to win a vote to leave the European Union and, above all, against the emergence of a centralised EU state.

NOTE! This site uses cookies and similar technologies.

If you not change browser settings, you agree to it. Learn more

I understand

Cookies are a technology which we use to provide you with tailored information on our website. A cookie is a piece of code that is sent to your internet browser and is stored on your system.

Please see below for a list of cookies this website uses:

Cookie name: _utma, _utmb, _utmc, _utmz

Purpose: Google Analytics cookies. Google Analytics is software that lets us analyse how visitors use our site. We use this information to improve our website and provide the best experience to visitors.

Function: These cookies collect data in an anonymous form. Please see Google's privacy policy for further information. To opt out of these cookies, please visit Google's website.

Cookie name: Sitecore

Purpose: Stores information, such as language and regional preferences, that our content management system (the system we use to update our website) relies on to function.

Function: This is a session cookie and will be destroyed when you close your browser. This cookie is essential for our website to function.

Cookie name: ASP.net_session

Purpose: Allows the website to save your session state across different pages. For example, if you have completed a survey, the website will remember that you have done so and will not ask you to complete it again when you view another page on the website.

Function: This is a session cookie and will be destroyed when you close your browser. This cookie is essential for our website to function.

Cookie name: website#sc_wede

Purpose: Indicates whether the user's browser supports inline editing of content. This indicates whether our content management system will work for our website administrators in their internet browsers.

Function: This is a session cookie and will be destroyed when you close your browser. This cookie is essential for our website to function.

Cookie name: redirected

Purpose: Remembers when the site forwards you from one page to another, so you can return to the first page. For example, go back to the home page after viewing a special 'splash' page.

Function: This is a session cookie, which your browser will destroy when it shuts down. The website needs this cookie to function.

Cookie name: tccookiesprefs

Purpose: Remembers when you respond to the site cookie policy, so you do not see the cookie preferences notice on every page.

Function: If you choose to remember your preference with a temporary cookie, your browser will remove it when you shut it down, otherwise the cookie will be stored for about a year.

Cookie name: _ga

Purpose: Additional Google Analytics cookie. Google Analytics is software that lets us analyse how visitors use our site. We use this information to improve our website and provide the best experience to visitors.

Function: These cookies collect data in an anonymous form. Please see Google's privacy policy for further information.

Cookie name: SC_ANALYTICS_GLOBAL_COOKIE, SC_ANALYTICS_SESSION_COOKIE

Purpose: Sitecore Analytics is software that lets us analyse how visitors use our site. We use this information to improve our website and provide the best experience to visitors.

Function: These cookies collect data in an anonymous form. When you close your browser, it will delete the 'session' cookie; it will keep the 'global' cookie for about one year.

Facebook cookies

We use Facebook 'Like' buttons to share site feedback. For further information, see Facebook's cookie policy page.

Twitter cookies

We use Twitter 'Tweet' buttons to share site feedback. For further information, see Twitter's privacy statement.

YouTube cookies

We embed videos from our official YouTube channel. YouTube uses cookies to help maintain the integrity of video statistics, prevent fraud and to improve their site experience. If you view a video, YouTube may set cookies on your computer once you click on the video player.

Cookies pop-up

When you close the cookies pop-up box by clicking "OK", a permanent cookie will be set on your machine. This will remember your preference so that the pop-up doesn't display across any pages whenever you visit the website.

Opting out/removing cookies

To opt out of Google Analytics cookies, please visit Google’s website.

You can also control what cookies you accept through your internet browser. For details on how to do this, please visit aboutcookies.org. Please note that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our website.

mailing list
donate now
join now
shop

A Question of Justice

The Rt Hon. Lord Lamont of Lerwick

Given the agitation in Britain (with which I sympathize) over the plight of British terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay, it is surprising that the same people are not at all perturbed by legislation currently before the British parliament that would allow European magistrates to arrest British citizens and whisk them off to jail in Europe. At least the Guantanamo suspects were combatants captured during a war that is ongoing. Ordinary civilians, however, would be subject of the so-called European Arrest Warrant. They may not face the death penalty, but they could be held for months without being charged, and in some cases without being given proper legal representation.

The European arrest warrant will, in effect, abolish extradition proceedings in British courts where extradition is requested by another EU country. As long as the identity of the accused is established no substantive defense is likely to get very far.

British government ministers deny this and refer to Clause 21 of the Extradition Bill, which gives judges the power to refuse an extradition if they believe it to be incompatible with the European Convention of Human Rights. But in the same breath ministers assure us that since all EU countries have signed this Convention there is no reason to worry about standards of justice in other countries.

In truth, ministers do not expect the courts to delay any extraditions, as they confidently forecast that the new procedures will cut the average time in extradition cases to three months from 18 months. Clearly such a reduction is only possible by a drastic closing off of the avenues of appeal. As a result, my guess is that we can expect the number of requests for extradition from Britain to rise.

The objection to a European arrest warrant is a fundamental one. People on trial in a foreign country are often treated unfairly. Many southern European countries such as Spain and Greece provide little or no legal aid, and if they do, they only offer inexperienced lawyers. In some countries bail is frequently refused to foreigners for fear they will abscond. In fact, there are several hundred British citizens on remand in Europe’s prisons many of whom would have been released on bail if they were nationals of the country holding them. This type of discriminatory imprisonment before trial results in punishment before guilt is proven, and handicaps the victim in the collection of evidence for his defence. In addition, translation facilities for foreigners are not always available, making judicial proceedings incomprehensible.

The deficiencies of the Greek justice system were all too clearly exposed last year in the high profile and farcical proceedings involving a group of English plane-spotters who were accused of espionage, threatened with imprisonment, and given inadequate legal representation. They were only freed after the British foreign secretary intervened. But will other Britons in the future be able to rely on the foreign secretary?

One of the most contentious proposals in the European Arrest Warrant is that British subjects will now be liable for extradition for offences that do not exist in U.K. law. The long-standing principle of dual criminality will be abolished, and the effect will be that British citizens will become subject to the laws of other countries without necessarily knowing what they are. “Xenophobia,” unknown in British law, will become an extraditable offence.

Attention has also focused on whether the editors of Britain’s tabloids might find themselves arrested for eurosceptic articles. It is strange that Europe may be going further in some respects in facilitating extradition between individual states of the Union than the United States - where some states have been known to refuse extradition to others.

A 1998 Council of Europe inquiry into justice systems throughout Europe found evidence of political interference (particularly involving judges); frequent cases of corruption and alarmingly, a very close relationship between the prosecution and the judiciary in some countries. The problems of justice systems in the new EU accession states are also well known. While they do deserve understanding, they cannot simply be ignored.

Perhaps the most powerful argument - from a British point of view - against the European Arrest Warrant is the practice of investigating magistrates in France, Italy, Germany Spain and Belgium of holding people in custody for questioning for long periods of time. This serves to deliberately build up pressure on the detained person to strike a bargain with the prosecutor and concede guilt. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former French finance minister, recently said, “In our system you are presumed innocent until declared guilty. The reality is you are seen as guilty from the moment the judicial system is interested in you.”

British ministers say that British citizens will only be extradited when they are specifically “accused” and when extradition is for the purpose of standing trial. But how can this be enforced? In some countries the legal system may regard arrest as the beginning of the process of prosecution, while in Britain it is viewed as the beginning of an investigation. Although the person may be accused, the decision whether to formally charge the arrested person or release them will occur while the arrested person is in custody, perhaps for many months.

Clearly the presumption of innocence means different things in different countries. To the British mind, the idea of an investigating magistrate detaining someone for an indefinite period, without charges, is at odds with the presumption of innocence. The truth is that the European Arrest Warrant, opportunistically accelerated after 9/11, is a political project to accelerate Europe’s integration by creating “a common judicial space”. It is a pity that justice doesn’t have much of a role.

This is from an article by Norman Lamont which first appeared in The Wall Street Journal Europe