EU-US INFORMAL SENIOR-LEVEL MEETING ON JUSTICE AND HOME

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HELSINKI 000696 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: SNAR PREL PGOV CVIS CPAS KCRM KFRD SMIG EUN FI SUBJECT: EU-US INFORMAL SENIOR-LEVEL MEETING ON JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS COOPERATION HELSINKI 00000696 001.2 OF 003 ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY. The U.S. and EU, under the chair of the Finnish Presidency, met in Helsinki on July 18 for the Informal Senior Level Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Meeting. Led by Acting INL DAS Elizabeth Verville, DOJ liaison to USEU Mark Richard, and DHS Acting A/S for Policy Development Paul Rosenzweig, USDEL continued its ongoing dialogue on issues related to counterterrorism, law enforcement, border security and migration. USDEL emphasized the importance of building upon existing cooperation and improving coordination, most notably to ensure a continuous flow of information between respective law enforcement agencies. In this regard, both sides welcomed the progress in negotiations for an agreement between the U.S. and Eurojust, as well as the final signature on the bilateral protocols that once ratified will enable the implementation of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) and Extradition Treaties. In addition, EU representatives confirmed that the passarelle option would be pursued under the Finnish Presidency and expressed hope that a final decision could be taken by December, which would thereby change decision making on justice related issues. USDEL thanked the EU for receipt of its proposal for a revised Passenger Name Record (PNR) agreement and welcomed future discussions. EU participants stressed the urgency to come to an agreement to cover the interim period, September 30, 2006 - November 2007, before a new agreement could be concluded. Lastly, EU reps requested the U.S. confirm a date for the U.S.-EU JHA Ministerial-Troika, proposed for November 6 in Washington. It was also suggested to hold the JHA High Level Policy Dialogue on Border and Transport Security (PDBTS) on the margins of the Ministerial meeting. END SUMMARY. Counterterrorism and Security -------------- ¶2. (SBU) EU reps provided a status report on the implementation of the EU Counterterrorism (CT) Strategy. While the EU is making progress on biometric requirements for passports, development of the Schengen Information System (SIS) II is facing technical difficulties and will likely not be ready by the April 2007 deadline. In response to a U.S. request for direct access for third countries to SIS II data, the EU stated it would be difficult to allow such access for political reasons, although there would be no technical impediments to sharing. However, the EU is currently exploring whether the Interpol database system could serve as an alternative with respect to sharing of specific categories of data. The European Commission (Commission) also reported it has been consulting with private sector stakeholders on critical infrastructure protection and on the development of detection technologies in the field of CT. On the latter initiative, the Commission will publish a green paper this summer and welcomes U.S. input. In regards to the misuse of charities, the EU has held discussions with the nonprofit sector, but indicated that it does not intend to pursue a legislative approach at this stage as a way to prevent terrorist support being accomplished via such charities. ¶3. (SBU) U.S. and EU participants agreed on the importance of coordinating with G8 CT initiatives and of promoting further research on terrorist's misuse of the Internet in order to tackle radicalization and recruitment. Richard stressed the importance of also focusing on operational issues in addition to concentrating on public diplomacy initiatives. The Commission noted that an EU delegation visited Washington on July 17 for consultations on the EU's project to develop a non-emotive lexicon. The EU is also establishing an expert advisory group that will issue two reports, one on the state of current research on radicalization due in November, and a second report on the phenomenon as such, which is due to be released in January 2007. A/S Rosenzweig briefly described DHS efforts in this area, including DHS Science and Technology's research programs and civil integration initiatives in Citizen and Immigrant Services and suggested that both sides coordinate efforts to avoid unnecessary duplication. ¶4. (SBU) EU representatives stressed the importance of recent dialogue with regard to human rights and terrorism, emphasizing the importance of POTUS statements at the June Summit on the intention to close the Guantanamo detention facility and the recent Supreme Court ruling on military tribunals to try enemy combatants. USDEL clarified that the Supreme Court ruling established Article III of the Geneva Convention as being applicable to enemy combatants and ruled that the system of military tribunals is inconsistent with U.S. law, which is being addressed by Congress. ¶5. (U) Under this item, USDEL also introduced Jane Horvath, DOJ's recently appointed Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer. She provided EU delegates with an overview of the data protection model in the U.S. government. In particular, she highlighted the focus on the protection of privacy in the Administration's information sharing efforts. [NOTE: On the margins, EU participants seemed very eager to learn more about Horvath's function within the U.S. system, HELSINKI 00000696 002.2 OF 003 particularly as it related to data protection and oversight. For example, Eurojust extended an invitation for Horvath to brief the organization on the Administration's data protection efforts. Europol requested a copy of her office's upcoming, statutorily mandated report. The EU Council Secretariat representative made comparisons with Horvath regarding U.S. data protection and EU data protection. He indicated a desire to learn more. END NOTE] Justice and Law Enforcement Issues -------------- ¶6. (SBU) Both sides praised the recent breakthrough in negotiations for a U.S.-Eurojust agreement, and highlighted the possibility of a signing ceremony at the U.S.-EU Ministerial in Washington this November. Eurojust also indicated its intention to circulate a questionnaire that once completed would assist in further discussions on the use of intelligence in criminal proceedings. In addition, with the final signature on the bilateral protocols of the U.S.-EU Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) and Extradition Treaties, the EU and U.S. agreed that training would be critical to ensure proper and timely implementation, especially of the banking provision, and should not wait until ratifications are complete. ¶7. (SBU) Europol also noted that three countries had yet to ratify the third protocol to the Europol Convention, which would allow U.S. access to Europol's analytical case files thereby increasing the depth of operational cooperation. Europol indicated that it would reach out to these remaining countries and USDEL indicated its intention to do so as well. USDEL also highlighted the need to work out processes for receiving requests from Europol as U.S. officials based in Europol had yet to develop a solid relationship with their Europol counterparts. ¶8. (SBU) In regard to the UN Convention against Corruption, Verville highlighted ongoing discussions in advance of the Conference of the States Parties (COSP) scheduled for December 2006 and stressed the importance of examining the core provisions, including criminalization, international cooperation and asset recovery. While monitoring would need to be looked at, Verville noted that a solid base for implementation must first be established. The Finnish rep expressed a preference to focus first on a monitoring mechanism. ¶9. (SBU) In relation to the Balkans, USDEL noted that the draft charter for SECI contained stringent data protection provisions that would prevent cooperation with the U.S. EU reps indicated that a second version is still in the drafting stages and offered no further information. On counter-narcotics issues in Afghanistan, EU reps reacted cautiously to a U.S. proposal for Member States to use the 1988 UN Drug Convention as the basis for extradition of drug traffickers as they foresaw problems related to jurisdiction in such cases. Eurojust agreed to take the issue back to The Hague and report the proposal to its members, getting back to the U.S. as soon as possible. ¶10. (SBU) The EU reported that progress had been slow on the EU draft Data Protection Framework Decision, but hoped to complete it by end of this year. EU reps refused to comment on how this Framework Decision could affect information sharing with third country law enforcement, or how or whether existing agreements would be preserved. Rosenzweig also highlighted for the EU that a vast majority of current law enforcement cooperation is conducted informally and outside the framework of formal agreements. The Finns also indicated that they will be moving forward on the passarelle option as a way to improve decision-making on justice and police matters and hoped for a decision by December. Under this option, unspecified justice issues would be moved from consensus decision making by Member States (Third Pillar) to qualified majority voting (First Pillar). Significantly, they would thereafter fall within the ambit of the current Pillar One Data Protection Directives, as well as Parliament involvement in any proposed legislation. ¶11. (SBU) Finally, USDEL informed EU reps that the U.S. would soon be placing an intellectual property (IP) enforcement coordinator in Eastern Europe, in addition to placing permanent IP attaches in select Embassies and Consulates. USDEL also provided an overview of a meeting between FBI and the European Police College (CEPOL) to discuss potential avenues of cooperation. The Commission emphasized that cooperation with the U.S. would have to be approved by the Council. Migration, Borders and Visa Issues -------------- ¶12. (SBU) USDEL thanked the EU for receipt of the EU's proposal for a revised PNR agreement and welcomed future discussions. EU participants stressed the urgency to come to an agreement to cover the interim period, September 30, 2006 - November 2007. In addition, HELSINKI 00000696 003.2 OF 003 EU reps noted that some Member States will need to invoke Constitutional procedures to ratify a new agreement, which might not happen until 2007. The EU hoped, but could not guarantee, that all Member States could put an agreement into immediate effect on a provisional basis, pending ultimate parliamentary endorsement. ¶13. (SBU) The Commission delegation noted that the release of their latest report on visa reciprocity would likely be delayed until September. ¶14. (SBU) Rosenzweig urged EU Member States to share lost and stolen passport (LASP) data with Interpol and suggested that they confiscate LASPs when found at borders - as the US is doing. Frelick (State/CA) provided a progress report on administering U.S. e-passports. In addition, the EU provided a brief overview of FRONTEX, which was established to facilitate operational cooperation at EU external borders. EU reps noted that FRONTEX was seeking to establish working relationships with third countries and had thus far reached out to Russian Border Guards. Rosenzweig indicated DHS interest in working cooperatively, particularly on best practices, and invited further discussion. Rosenzweig also discussed developing aviation entry/exit screening in light of a possible pandemic to avoid stopping all international travel, and asked the EU to consider working with us to develop a common set of protocols or standards. The EU reps cautioned that data protection would need to be addressed before such cooperation could ensue which might include any effort to identify individual travelers. Other Issues -------------- ¶15. (SBU) At the end of the meeting, German Director General Gunter Krause questioned when the Finnish Presidency would conduct the expert group meeting, as indicated in the May 4, Vienna communiqu, to discuss the future EU-U.S.-Russian tripartite cooperation and make recommendations for the German Presidency. Verville inquired as to what topics the EU/Presidencies had in mind, as well as the advantages and recommendations of such a dialogue. Verville suggested that the U.S. and EU discuss respective bilateral cooperation with Russia in advance of conducting a meeting that included other countries. She also added that while the U.S. remained open to the concept, she was not in a position to put forth any suggestions as the U.S. had not yet identified discussion topics that would achieve concrete benefits. The EU Presidency agreed with Verville's summation and suggestion. [NOTE: On the margins of the dinner, Krause, sensing a lack of enthusiasm from Finland or in Germany raised with Verville and Rosenzweig an uncleared proposal to continue the four Presidency-U.S.-Russian dialogue by, in essence, expanding the tripartite meeting with Russia to include Azerbaijan, Armenia, Moldova and Georgia. In response to Verville's question as to what they would expect to raise/achieve in such an expanded meeting, Krause said he was looking for answers, but did not have one himself. Krause said they would await an answer/reaction from the U.S., and Verville replied that such an answer would be facilitated by knowing what they had in mind by way of an agenda and outcomes. END NOTE] ¶16. (U) The U.S. delegation included: Elizabeth Verville, State Acting INL DAS; Paul Rosenzweig, DHS Acting A/S for Policy Development; Mark Richard, DOJ Liaison to USEU; Kathleen Conway, CBP Liaison to USEU; Christine Cline, State/INL; Timothy Eydelnant, Emb Helsinki; Alcy Frelick, State/CA; Jane Horvath, DOJ; Kenneth Kolb, Emb Helsinki; Alessandro Nardi, State/EUR; Kenneth Prop, State/L; Michael Scardaville, DHS; and Jessica Steffens, State/INL. ¶17. (U) EU participants included: Antti Pelttari, Director General for the International Security Affairs Unit in the Finnish Ministry of Interior; Matti Jousten, EU-Coordinator in the Finnish Ministry of Justice; Giles de Kerchove, Director in the EU Council Secretariat; Paul Hickey, Director in the EU Council Secretariat; SIPDIS Marque Tung-Lai, Director of JLS General Affairs in the European Commission; Jan De Ceuster, Head of the Unit on Borders and Visas in the European Commission; Roelof-Jan Manshot, Vice-President of Eurojust; Maz-Peter Ratzel, Director of Europol; Michael Grotz, Deputy Director General of German Federal Ministry of Justice; Gunter Krause, German Federal Ministry of the Interior; as well as Vivian Loonela, Administrator in the European Commission; Christiane Hohmann, Administrator in the European Commission; Kari Rantama, Finnish Deputy National Police Commissioner; Pentti Visanen, Finnish Immigration Department; Kalle Kekomaki, Finnish Ministry of Interior; Elina Isoksela, Finnish Ministry of Justice; Sakari Vourensola, Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA); Leena Kiukkonen, Finnish MFA; Juha Rainne, Finnish MFA; Hikka Nenonen, Finnish MFA; and, Veli-Pekka Rautava, Finnish MFA. ¶18. (U) This cable has been cleared by the U.S. Delegation. WARE