Europol Public Information
/ The Hague, 10 May 2011File no. 2610-208
DMS#523908rev5
5
Europol Public Information
Sixth Meeting of National Experts on Joint Investigation Teams
The Hague, 02 - 03 December 2010
The sixth meeting of National Experts on Joint Investigation Teams (JITs), jointly organised by Eurojust and Europol, was held at Europol’s premises in The Hague, the Netherlands, on 02 and 03 December 2010.
The meeting was attended by practitioners from 22 Member States and by representatives of the Commission, the General Secretariat of the Council, Europol and Eurojust.
This meeting, in line with the previous ones, involved the sharing of experiences, with presentations provided from various JITs, outlining their experiences, strong points, possible lessons to be learnt and recommendations to practitioners. This information and experience exchange forms a significant part of the added value these annual meetings provide.
In addition to these exchanges of best practice and experience, a large amount of time was also dedicated to the support available to JITs, in their establishment, as well as during their operation. This support, be it operational, supportive or financial, was presented by Europol, Eurojust as well as the Commission.
The theme of support to JITs, as well as their functioning and establishment of best practice, was addressed in the two workshops. One workshop discussed and had as its focus the profile requirements for the successful JIT expert at national level, identifying role and mission related i.e. to expertise and awareness, and the other workshop focused on a solution-oriented discussion on main commonly encountered issues during setting-up, running and conclusion of JITs, as identified by practitioners.
The conclusions of the Workshops are attached below. Overall, the meeting provided an excellent opportunity for exchanges and discussion, and added valuable ideas and recommendations as found in the conclusions of the workshop.
Conclusions / Recommendations Workshop 1
The JIT Expert
· The JIT experts must be privileged contact points for national and international authorities dealing with JITs providing them information and advice about possibilities including legal framework, for the establishment of JITs
• hold a strong expertise and practical experience in JITs, be the central contact point for JITs in her/his country, available 24/7 for questions and accessible when answers are needed
• excellent networker/in involved at an early stage of investigation with police and judicial authorities, aware of how to make full use of the expertise available in EJ, EP, EJN and at JIT experts in other MS
• be able to answer legal questions concerning establishment of the JITs in their own country; know-how (substance of their laws and EU laws and other EU MS laws)
• provides national guidelines on how to set-up a JIT
• be pro-active, establish a data warehouse to gather and disseminate information on best practice identified/ evaluation results/ JIT agreement texts and all other aspects of JITs in their MS
• be responsible for awareness raising/marketing; report success stories (sell your successes, report in newsletters, set up national trainings etc)
• to promote JITs in particular with neighbor countries but consider going beyond that
• linking pin with national practitioners able to provide reliable information
• JIT expert to attend internal evaluation and final de briefing of their MS JITs
JIT Funding Project
• JIT expert to be familiar with funding schemes of the EU COM and of EJ (full range of funding possibilities versus support for limited number of activities)
• funding procedure needs to be less bureaucratic and more streamlined with practitioner needs for swift solutions
• EJ and EP to support awareness raising about different funding possibilities
JIT secretariat priorities
• implementation of the findings of the 5th JIT expert meeting with priority in the following areas:
• Secretariat to become a centre of excellence on court decisions and outcomes of JITs; directory of JIT experts; funding issues
• Secretariat to collect best practice/training material/awareness material identified from JIT expert at national level in order to make it available for JIT experts in other MS
• Secretariat with support of EP to establish an expert platform for direct exchange of non personal related information
JIT Experts Needs
• put in a position where they can actively identify cases in which JITs would be appropriate (role of EP/EJ)
• receive support in organisation of regional awareness meetings regarding JITs and JIT funding from EP/EJ/CEPOL/EJN
• get the national support (budget and manpower to execute their role)
Conclusions:
The group identified the following topics
• earlier engagement; advise from EP/EJ; training; awareness + marketing
• need for earlier, faster and easier access to funding
• to work with and develop the work of the secretariat and the expert platform therein
Conclusions / Recommendations Workshop 2
Ø A mini-survey was submitted in advance of the annual meeting, to the members of the JIT Experts Network, trying to identify commonly encountered issues. A significant amount of replies were received, although it must be stressed that the survey may not be representative. The overall conclusions should be seen as a snapshot rather than an authoritative overview applicable across the Member States.
Ø The main two aspects of the outcome of the survey are
o No insurmountable or overarching problems were identified by the respondents in the setting-up, running and conclusion of JITs. A large majority of the respondents reported encountering no major impediments in the application of the JIT concept as a tool of interstate police and judicial cooperation.
o The same number of respondents was satisfied with the outcome of the JIT, would set-up a JIT again, both in principle and in the specific case, as well as recommends the usage of a JIT to colleagues and promoted their usage in general.
Ø While not all participants were convinced that all parts of the Model Agreement suited direct usage, they recognized that it can be used as a check list to make sure that no point was missed out.
With respect to the OAP, the JIT experts felt that it was up to each country to attach it or not to their JIT Agreement.
Ø It was suggested that the formal aspects of the setting up of a JIT such as the drafting of the agreement as well as the application for funding could be dealt with by experts on the matter which would allow the practitioners to focus on the operational activities. It may be a consideration for each MS to develop such expertise at a national level.
Ø The process for application to funding would be facilitated by the early involvement of Europol and Eurojust, including specifically in the pre-JIT stages for assistance in the drafting of the JIT Agreement, as well as assistance in the application for funding – both directly from Eurojust, as well as the Commission.
Ø In relation to funding, it was generally acknowledged that JITs are costly. Expenditure for travel, equipment, translation and interpretation and cost for meeting facilities are considered to be the potential major overheads.
Ø The procedures to apply for funding for JITs at the Commission were found cumbersome and not appropriate for the particularities of international police/judicial cooperation. The procedural requirements, including the duration of the process, are not suitable for the objectives of supporting individual operational JITs. An adjustment of the procedural aspects specifically for JITs, taking into account the need for flexibility, quick provision / evaluation of application is desired. Likewise, Europol and Eurojust should consider continuing improving their role in the facilitation for applying to these funds.
Ø Some delegates mentioned they would welcome an extension of the range of the available support, such as purchase of specific law enforcement equipment.
Ø Awareness of the funds available and the related application procedures should be enhanced, both at European as well as national level. Consideration could be given by the national authorities to focus and develop expertise in respect of funding.
Ø Communication amongst members of a JIT is solved pragmatically, and usually involves the choice of one common language. In respect of translation, an ad-hoc and economic approach is generally taken.
Ø Training / Briefing for seconded members may be helpful, if considered with a pragmatic approach as to the length, duration and intensity being tailored to the case, ranging from a mini-briefing to a proper training.
5