Progress: Procedure lapsed or withdrawn
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | LIBE |
SONIK Bogusław ( PPE-DE)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | JURI |
SAKALAS Aloyzas ( PSE)
|
|
| Committee Legal Basis Opinion | JURI |
LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE Antonio ( PPE-DE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
Treaty on the European Union (after Amsterdam) M 031, Treaty on the European Union (after Amsterdam) M 034-p2
Legal Basis:
Treaty on the European Union (after Amsterdam) M 031, Treaty on the European Union (after Amsterdam) M 034-p2Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted a resolution drafted by Bogusław SONIK (EPP-ED, PL) and made some amendments to the Belgian initiative. (Please see the summary of 13/03/2006.) A number of amendments are intended to improve the wording and tighten up some definitions in the legislative text
Parliament stated that, given that, within the same Member State and across the European Union, the range of possible prohibitions arising from criminal convictions is broad and the nature and methods of applying those sanctions can vary considerably, priority should be given to sectors where a common basis already exists between the Member States.
Member States shall take the necessary steps to ensure that any prohibition, including any prohibition imposed by other Member States, is registered in the criminal record. In addition, Where the applicable international instruments on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters so allow, prohibitions imposed by third countries shall be registered in the criminal record.
The committee adopted the report by Bogusław SONIK (EPP-ED, PL) broadly approving - under the consultation procedure - the initiative by the Kingdom of Belgium calling for a Council framework decision on the recognition and enforcement in the EU of prohibitions arising from convictions for sexual offences committed against children. MEPs adopted a number of amendments to improve the wording and tighten up some definitions in the legislative text. One of the key changes would oblige Member States also to include in their criminal records any related prohibition imposed by non-EU countries.
PURPOSE : to present a Belgian initiative which aims to adopt a framework decision on the recognition and enforcement in the European Union of prohibitions arising from convictions for sexual offences committed against children.
CONTENT : it should be noted that this initiative is intended as a useful supplement, in the particularly troubling area of sexual offences against children, to the proposal for a Council Decision on the exchange of information extracted from criminal records (please refer to CNS/2004/0238).
Combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and in particular combating risks of recidivism in this context, should be a priority for the Union. In this particular area Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA of 22 December 2003 on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography established a minimum common EU approach to these criminal offences, in particular as regards the type of penalty and prohibition that should be provided for by national legislation. The principle of mutual recognition should be applicable to temporary or permanent prohibition from exercising professional activities related to the supervision of children, which is expressly provided for by the Framework Decision, where that prohibition is consequent upon a criminal conviction for one of the offences connected to the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.
Awareness of the existence of such a prohibition in one Member State is a prerequisite for its recognition and enforcement in another Member State. Several international instruments govern the exchange of information on convictions, in particular the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 20 April 1959, which provides that Member States are to inform each other of all criminal convictions and subsequent measures entered in the criminal records that concern their nationals. It is necessary to improve the existing legal framework for exchanging information on the prohibitions associated with such convictions. This draft Framework Decision applies to the offences covered in Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA of 22 December 2003 on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.
Its purpose is to establish the rules under which a Member State shall recognise and enforce in its territory prohibitions arising from convictions for such offences.
The proposed Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.
More specifically, the drafts states that Member States shall take the necessary steps to ensure that any prohibition is registered in the criminal record. When the issuing State passes on criminal record information to another Member State under the applicable international rules on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, it shall mention the prohibition in the excerpt from the criminal record. The central authority of the issuing State shall also indicate the duration of the prohibition.
Where application is made in the framework of this Framework Decision for the criminal records of a Member State, in accordance with national law, with a view to obtaining information on a national of another Member State, an application shall always be made to the central authority of the Member State of which the person concerned is a national.
Moreover, the proposal highlights the procedures for the recognition and enforcement of the prohibition. The competent authorities of the enforcing State shall recognise any prohibition, without any formalities being required, and shall enforce it, unless the competent authorities decide to invoke one of the grounds for non-recognition or non-enforcement stated below. When an enforcing State is informed of the existence of a prohibition, it shall forward that information to the competent authority. The competent authority shall issue its decision within thirty days of such information being forwarded.
On the other hand, the proposal sets out reasons for non-recognition or non-enforcement. Refusal to recognise and enforce a prohibition may only happen if: the penalty is time-limited under the law of the enforcing State, where the offences concerned are subject to the jurisdiction of that State under its own criminal law; the conviction was handed down in default of appearance and the person concerned was not summoned in person nor otherwise informed of the date and location of the hearing that led to the conviction handed down in default of appearance; a conviction was handed down on the person concerned for the same offences in the enforcing State.
If the duration of the prohibition exceeds the maximum provided for by the law of the enforcing State for the same offence, the duration of the enforced prohibition shall be reduced to that maximum.
Each Member State shall put in place the necessary arrangements to ensure that the convicted person has a non-suspensive legal remedy against the recognition and enforcement of a prohibition.
Lastly, the central authority of the issuing State shall inform the central authority of the enforcing State of any subsequent measure affecting the prohibition, including review, pardon, amnesty, rehabilitation and erasure.
PURPOSE : to present a Belgian initiative which aims to adopt a framework decision on the recognition and enforcement in the European Union of prohibitions arising from convictions for sexual offences committed against children.
CONTENT : it should be noted that this initiative is intended as a useful supplement, in the particularly troubling area of sexual offences against children, to the proposal for a Council Decision on the exchange of information extracted from criminal records (please refer to CNS/2004/0238).
Combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and in particular combating risks of recidivism in this context, should be a priority for the Union. In this particular area Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA of 22 December 2003 on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography established a minimum common EU approach to these criminal offences, in particular as regards the type of penalty and prohibition that should be provided for by national legislation. The principle of mutual recognition should be applicable to temporary or permanent prohibition from exercising professional activities related to the supervision of children, which is expressly provided for by the Framework Decision, where that prohibition is consequent upon a criminal conviction for one of the offences connected to the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.
Awareness of the existence of such a prohibition in one Member State is a prerequisite for its recognition and enforcement in another Member State. Several international instruments govern the exchange of information on convictions, in particular the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 20 April 1959, which provides that Member States are to inform each other of all criminal convictions and subsequent measures entered in the criminal records that concern their nationals. It is necessary to improve the existing legal framework for exchanging information on the prohibitions associated with such convictions. This draft Framework Decision applies to the offences covered in Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA of 22 December 2003 on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.
Its purpose is to establish the rules under which a Member State shall recognise and enforce in its territory prohibitions arising from convictions for such offences.
The proposed Framework Decision shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union.
More specifically, the drafts states that Member States shall take the necessary steps to ensure that any prohibition is registered in the criminal record. When the issuing State passes on criminal record information to another Member State under the applicable international rules on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, it shall mention the prohibition in the excerpt from the criminal record. The central authority of the issuing State shall also indicate the duration of the prohibition.
Where application is made in the framework of this Framework Decision for the criminal records of a Member State, in accordance with national law, with a view to obtaining information on a national of another Member State, an application shall always be made to the central authority of the Member State of which the person concerned is a national.
Moreover, the proposal highlights the procedures for the recognition and enforcement of the prohibition. The competent authorities of the enforcing State shall recognise any prohibition, without any formalities being required, and shall enforce it, unless the competent authorities decide to invoke one of the grounds for non-recognition or non-enforcement stated below. When an enforcing State is informed of the existence of a prohibition, it shall forward that information to the competent authority. The competent authority shall issue its decision within thirty days of such information being forwarded.
On the other hand, the proposal sets out reasons for non-recognition or non-enforcement. Refusal to recognise and enforce a prohibition may only happen if: the penalty is time-limited under the law of the enforcing State, where the offences concerned are subject to the jurisdiction of that State under its own criminal law; the conviction was handed down in default of appearance and the person concerned was not summoned in person nor otherwise informed of the date and location of the hearing that led to the conviction handed down in default of appearance; a conviction was handed down on the person concerned for the same offences in the enforcing State.
If the duration of the prohibition exceeds the maximum provided for by the law of the enforcing State for the same offence, the duration of the enforced prohibition shall be reduced to that maximum.
Each Member State shall put in place the necessary arrangements to ensure that the convicted person has a non-suspensive legal remedy against the recognition and enforcement of a prohibition.
Lastly, the central authority of the issuing State shall inform the central authority of the enforcing State of any subsequent measure affecting the prohibition, including review, pardon, amnesty, rehabilitation and erasure.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)2902
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T6-0236/2006
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0068/2006
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0068/2006
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE368.062
- Committee opinion: PE364.879
- Committee opinion: PE365.044
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE364.770
- Legislative proposal: 14207/2004
- Legislative proposal published: 14207/2004
- Legislative proposal: 14207/2004
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE364.770
- Committee opinion: PE364.879
- Committee opinion: PE365.044
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE368.062
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A6-0068/2006
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)2902
Activities
- Hélène GOUDIN
Plenary Speeches (5)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Luís QUEIRÓ
Plenary Speeches (5)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Charlotte CEDERSCHIÖLD
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Christofer FJELLNER
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Glyn FORD
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Bruno GOLLNISCH
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Gunnar HÖKMARK
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Anna IBRISAGIC
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Andreas MÖLZER
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Prohibitions on certain sex offenders (debate)
- Carl SCHLYTER
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Jan ANDERSSON
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Gérard DEPREZ
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Edite ESTRELA
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Ewa HEDKVIST PETERSEN
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Anna HEDH
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Timothy KIRKHOPE
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Ole KRARUP
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Tobias PFLÜGER
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- José RIBEIRO E CASTRO
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Manuel dos SANTOS
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Lydia SCHENARDI
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Inger SEGELSTRÖM
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Eva-Britt SVENSSON
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Timothy Charles Ayrton TANNOCK
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Åsa WESTLUND
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Vittorio AGNOLETTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Zsolt László BECSEY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Johannes BLOKLAND
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Derek Roland CLARK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Philip CLAEYS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Bairbre de BRÚN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Koenraad DILLEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Avril DOYLE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Lena EK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Duarte FREITAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Gyula HEGYI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Vytautas LANDSBERGIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Carl LANG
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Marine LE PEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Jules MAATEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Sérgio MARQUES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Jean-Claude MARTINEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- David MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Aloyzas SAKALAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- José Albino SILVA PENEDA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Bogusław SONIK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Frank VANHECKE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Sahra WAGENKNECHT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Anders WIJKMAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Zbigniew ZALESKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Tomáš ZATLOUKAL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/1/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AM-364770_EN.html
|
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AD-364879_EN.html
|
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AD-365044_EN.html
|
| docs/6/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=4718&j=0&l=en
|
| events/0/date |
Old
2004-11-05T00:00:00New
2004-11-04T00:00:00 |
| committees/2 |
|
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE364.879
|
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE365.044&secondRef=02
|
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE368.062New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE368.062 |
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0068_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0068_EN.html |
| docs/6/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=4718&j=0&l=en
|
| events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
| events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
| events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0068_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0068_EN.html |
| events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20060531&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20060531&type=CRE |
| events/6 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE364.879&secondRef=02New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE364.879 |
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE365.044New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE365.044&secondRef=02 |
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2006-68&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0068_EN.html |
| docs/6 |
|
| events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2006-68&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0068_EN.html |
| events/5 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2006-236New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2006-0236_EN.html |
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
LIBE/6/25416New
|
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
| links/European Commission/title |
Old
PreLexNew
EUR-Lex |
| procedure/subject/1 |
Old
7.30.30.02 Action to combat violence and trafficking in human beingsNew
7.30.30.02 Action to combat violence, trafficking in human beings and migrant smuggling |
| activities/1/committees/1/committee_full |
Old
${committee.text}New
Legal Affairs |
| activities/2/committees/1/committee_full |
Old
${committee.text}New
Legal Affairs |
| activities/3/committees/1/committee_full |
Old
${committee.text}New
Legal Affairs |
| committees/1/committee_full |
Old
${committee.text}New
Legal Affairs |
| procedure/title |
Old
Combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography: recognition and enforcement of prohibitions arising from convictions for sexual offences. Framework Decision. Initiative BelgiumNew
Combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography: recognition and enforcement of prohibitions arising from convictions for sexual offences |
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|