Date: 2006
Type: Working Paper
Le traité de Prüm Une vraie-fausse coopération renforcée dans l’Espace de sécurité de liberté et de justice
Working Paper, EUI LAW, 2006/32
ZILLER, Jacques, Le traité de Prüm Une vraie-fausse coopération renforcée dans l’Espace de sécurité de liberté et de justice, EUI LAW, 2006/32 - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/6401
Retrieved from Cadmus, EUI Research Repository
The paper is a first critical analysis of the 'Prüm Convention on deepening transfrontier cooperation, amongst others in view of combating terrorism, transfrontier crime, and illegal migration', which was signed by Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Spain on 27 May 2005 and which will enter into force after its ratification by two States. While its scope is clearly in the field of police cooperation of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice of the EU and EC treaties, it has not been adopted according to the reinforced cooperation procedure available under the Nice Treaty. While it represents a progress in the field of police cooperation against the signatory member states, it shows a number of negative aspects. It represents a regression as compared to the - rather insufficient - provisions which would be applicable to the adoption of such measures under the relevant provisions of the EU and EC treaties as it has been adopted after a process behind hidden doors, and this is reflected in a number of clauses of the treaty which may be considered as poorly drafted or even dangerous. The full (French) version of the convention is published as an annex to the paper.
Cadmus permanent link: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/6401
ISSN: 1725-6739
Series/Number: EUI LAW; 2006/32
Keyword(s): Democracy Legitimacy Multilevel governance National autonomy Open coordination Organization theory Policy networks Sovereignty Acquis communautaire Closer cooperation Competences Differentiated integration Dispute resolution EU Charter of Fundamental Rights European citizenship European law Fundamental/human rights Free movement Judicial review