This paper assesses the uses and misuses in the application of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) system in the EU by examining the main quantitative results of this new extradition system achieved between 2005 and 2011. It argues that the next generation of the EU’s criminal justice cooperation and the EAW need to recognise and acknowledge that the mutual trust premise upon which the European system has been built so far is no longer viable without devising new structures and evaluation mechanisms for EU policy stakeholders.

Regulatory agencies such as Europol, Frontex, Eurojust, CEPOL as well as bodies such as OLAF, have over the past decade become increasingly active within the institutional architecture constituting the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and are now placed at the forefront of implementing and developing the EU’s internal security model.  A prominent feature of agency activity is the large-scale proliferation of ‘knowledge’ on security threats via the production of policy tools such as threat assessments, risk analyses, periodic and situation reports.

Does the 2009 Stockholm Programme matter? This paper addresses the controversies experienced at EU institutional levels as to ‘who’ should have ownership of the contours of the EU’s policy and legislative multiannual programming in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) in a post-Lisbon Treaty landscape. It examines the struggles around the third multiannual programme on the AFSJ, i.e. the Stockholm Programme, and the dilemmas affecting its implementation.

This paper reflects on the challenges facing the effective implementation of the new EU fundamental rights architecture that emerged from the Lisbon Treaty. Particular attention is paid to the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and its ability to function as a ‘fundamental rights tribunal’. The paper first analyses the praxis of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and its long-standing experience in overseeing the practical implementation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

This paper examines two recent events in which people on the move making their way from Libya to Europe across the Mediterranean were either abandoned to die at sea or ‘pushed back’ (Hirsi case). It argues that these two cases are not incidental or isolated but rather part of a broader situation of concern in the Mediterranean. The paper highlights this situation and also connects it to Europe’s response to migratory flows during the Arab Spring.

The Schengen system has been at the centre of sharp controversy throughout 2011 and the early months of 2012 arising from attempts by several member state governments to challenge the right to the free movement of persons and the abolition of internal border checks. The speech delivered by Nicolas Sarkozy early this month (March 2012), as part of the French presidential campaign, in which he threatened to suspend France’s participation in Schengen illustrates this phenomenon.

This study addresses the role of local and regional authorities (LRAs) in preserving the dignity and access to fundamental rights by undocumented immigrants in the EU. It does so by examining the following research questions:

Migratory pressure from abroad and populist trends in Europe have already put considerable stress on borderless Europe, despite the open borders being one of its most precious achievements. But what in the past could be seen as annoying yet temporary disturbances attained an entirely different character under the Danish initiative launched in early May 2011. The move to install permanent controls, including customs houses and video surveillance, alarmed not just Brussels but also travellers and business associations EU-wide.

This paper critically examines the policy implications of the ongoing Canada-Czech Republic visa dispute for the founding principles of the EU’s immigration and asylum policies, notably those of reciprocity and solidarity. It addresses the main challenges posed by the unilateral reintroduction of visa requirements for nationals of the Czech Republic for the EU’s common visa policy, and for the fundamental rights of European citizens who belong to vulnerable and excluded groups, i.e. Roma, in search of international protection.

This report examines the nature, the limits and potential of the principle of integration as a two-way process of mutual accommodation between migrants and the receiving societies. It assesses the extent to which this key principle, which lays at the foundation of the EU framework on integration, is implemented in practice by investigating how it informs national programmes supported by the European integration fund.

This Policy Brief is based on a case study conducted within Work Package 1 of the INEX project on the development of the Schengen Information System II (SIS II), as set out in the author’s earlier working document, “The Difficult Road to the Schengen Information System II: The Legacy of ‘Laboratories’ and the Cost for Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law”.

In February 2011, the European Commission published a proposal for a new Directive on the use of passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crimes. This proposal replaces an earlier draft of 2007 for a Framework Decision on the use of PNR data for law enforcement purposes. The new proposal does not seem to allay the earlier concerns of important stakeholders with regard to the 2007 proposal.

There is no doubt that EU measures on the automated processing of data on individuals have an impact on fundamental rights. But which fundamental rights are more deeply affected by them? And how should these rights be safeguarded to ensure the effective protection of individuals and democratic societies? This Policy Brief highlights a series of elements that are critical to addressing the legal dilemmas arising in this area and puts forward recommendations based on research undertaken for the INEX project (Work Package 2).