Around EuropeQuaker Counc i l fo r European Af fa i r s

No. 356 April‐May 2014

A comparision between voter turnouts at EU and national elections. Image Credit: Chris Diskin

EU Citizens' Interaction with their Parliaments

2014 is an election year for the European Union (EU).Between 22 and 25 May, EU citizens will choose a newEuropean Parliament (EP). 751 Members of theEuropean Parliament (MEPs) will be elected from 28Member States. For those working in any aspect of EUpolitics, this is obviously a major event, and it isalready being widely discussed. As the elections drawnearer, this debate will spread as it becomes a morepressing concern for national politicians, the press,and civil society.

But what will happen after the elections? Whathappens when there is no longer a major event comingup to coerce discussion on EU issues? As the electedrepresentatives settle into their parliamentary duties,do ordinary people disregard the EP and, moregenerally, European policy‐making?

Research shows that EU citizens see the EP as lessimportant than their national legislative institutions. Itis also clear that citizens trust their MEPs less thantheir national representatives. A 2012 report from anindependent think‐tank found that 50 per cent ofparticipants said they did not trust the EP. Voterturnouts are almost always lower in EP elections thanin national ballots. In 2009 just 43 per cent of the EUelectorate voted in the EP elections, far fewer than inthe majority of EU Member State national legislativeelections (as shown in the graph above). According to

the EU’s own monitoring service, Eurobarometer, while90 per cent of Europeans said they had anunderstanding of the EP, only 19 per cent said theyconnected the word ‘democracy’ with the institutions.In Finland this dropped to 12 per cent, and in the UK itplummeted to just 7 per cent. Clearly, many citizensdo not think that voting for their MEP is necessary, donot see the EU as democratic, and do not trust the EP.It should be noted that the same research showed thatpeople are not particularly hostile to the EU. Althoughabout a fifth (18 per cent) of EU citizens sawmembership as a ‘bad thing’, 48 per cent saw it as a‘good thing’. A further 31 per cent saw it as neutral,‘neither good nor bad’. Collectively, these statisticssuggest an overall indifference towards the EU: people

In this issue:EU Citizens' Interaction with their Parliaments (p.1)QCEA's Action Alerts (p.2)The EU should Prepare for Peace Not War (p.3)2014: Important Moment for Criminal Justice (p.5)Introducing Our New Intern (p.7)Quaker House News (p.7)Call for Action: Investor‐State DisputeSettlement Clause (p.8)

Find us on Facebook, search for 'QCEA'! Follow us on Twitter @QCEA. 2

do not have an aversion to the EU, but they do nottake an active role through actions such as voting.

One key area of QCEA’s work isdemocratic governance: encouragingcitizens to interact with EU legislatorsand to participate in EU policyformulations, helping to improvedecision making. There are variousopportunities for Quakers (and, indeed,anyone) to engage with the EU. Voting isan obvious method of engaging withlegislators, but so is responding to EUconsultations wherever possible orwriting to local MEPs to raise concerns.QCEA is here to help and support suchinteractions.

Although national parliaments are important andshould not be ignored, the EU plays an important rolein making decisions that affect us. It has competenciesin many areas which significantly impact on citizen’slives. The EU alone manages the customs union that isso vital to the economies of member states. It also hasan exclusive right to negotiate international FreeTrade Agreements such at the Transatlantic Trade and

Investment Treaty, which could have a huge impact onEuropean living standards. The EU shares responsibilityfor regulations on the environment, energy,

agriculture, and food, ensuring quality,safety, and sustainability. It also investsconsiderable energy on programmes tofoster peace across the globe, includingIsrael and Palestine.

The EP plays a significant role increating the laws and agreements whichshape our lives. While the EU employs amore complex system of governance anddemocracy than the majority ofmembers state legislations, theParliament and MEPs are a criticalcomponent of the democratic process.Not voting for the new EP should be

considered a wasted opportunity for individuals toconnect with an institution working on their behalf.This year’s elections are an important opportunity todebate EU politics and policy, and, after the elections,EU citizens, including Quakers, should make moreefforts to interact with their representative MEPs tohelp shape EU policies that work towards a moresustainable, equal, and peaceful world.

Chris Diskin

PhotoCred

it:Co

med

y_no

se,CC

The EU elections are in May

QCEA's Action AlertsSign up to participate in calls to action on EU policy! QCEA operates a system of action alerts, in which wesend out e‐mails to Friends and others who have signed up to receive them, on the following topics;

PeacePalestine/IsraelCriminal Justice

Sustainability and EnergyOther topics as they arise.

How does it work?

When QCEA identifies an advocacy point on which the input of European citizens and residents may helpmove things forward, we will let you know. We may ask you to send a letter or e‐mail to specific policy‐makers, to write to your MEP, or to respond to a call for consultation responses from the public. To help you,we will send a model letter or a series of model answers on the topic, so the background research is preparedfor you. You may, of course, use this model letter or send a different one of your own devising. What isimportant is that EU citizens are participating in the making of policy.

To sign up

To sign up for action alerts, send an e‐mail with your name, country of residence, and citizenship to Gordonat office@qcea.org

We look forward to hearing from you!More information: http://www.qcea.org/home/involved/action‐alerts/

3 “Let nothing dim the light that shines from within.” Maya Angelou

idPd

The European Union Should Prepare forPeace and Not War

Assessing the impact of the European Union on peacein the world is a complex task. The activities of the EUaffect people around the globe. The Lisbon Treatycommits the EU to promoting and contributing topeace. Indeed, how the EU contributes to peace is atheme of this month's QCEA Study Tour, which will haveparticipants from the EU as well as from Ukraine,Lebanon, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

As a peace project, the EU replaced militaryconfrontation with cooperation and trade. Theexpansion of the EU hashelped to stabilisedemocracy in southern,central, and easternEurope. EU MemberStates also givecomparativelygenerously todevelopment assistanceand to internationalorganisations, such asthe United Nations andthe InternationalCriminal Court.However, the picture isnot all positive.

In December 2012 theNorwegian NobelCommittee awardedthe Peace Prize to theEuropean Union,praising the transformation of "a continent of war to acontinent of peace". This decision was widelycriticised, particularly because Europe is home tosome of the world’s biggest arms dealers. DesmondTutu, who received the Peace Prize in 1984 for his rolein the anti‐apartheid campaign, said the EU's role as amilitary power was inconsistent with the values of theprize. The military role includes the trade in Frenchmissiles, British aircraft, German submarines, andItalian small arms. Furthermore, Europeangovernments and the European Commission haveagreed to prioritise support to strengthen Europeanarms companies.

Following the EU's failure to interrupt the violence inthe former Yugoslavia in the 1990s, it was recognisedthat the EU needed to assume responsibilities forpreventing conflict. The Lisbon Treaty, which camento force in December 2009, was a cornerstone in theevelopment of the Common Security and Defenceolicy (CSDP). It introduced the option for the EU toeploy conflict prevention missions. The treaty also

allowed for the creation of the European ExternalAction Service (EEAS), and the role of HighRepresentative for Common Foreign and Security Policywas created to provide a strong single voice for the EUin foreign affairs.

Civilian peacebuildingSince its first civilian police operation in Bosnia‐Herzegovina in 2002, the EU has conducted 30 civilianand military CSDP missions. Most operations have been

civilian in natureand seek toprevent violenceby identifying therisk of conflict atan earlier stage,understanding theconflict better,and taking actionearlier.

QCEA welcomesthe civilian natureof these missions,which has allowedthe EU to focus onsecurity of theindividuals andcommunitieswithin a territory,rather than

specific Member State interests. CSDP missions haveshown that addressing the needs of the populationcreates more sustainable outcomes; it is particularlybeneficial where the legitimacy of the government andsecurity services are disputed. The positive results ofcivilian approaches can be seen in Georgia where theEU monitoring mission helped to reduce conflict“through liaison, facilitation of contacts betweenparties and other confidence building measures”.

Finding peaceful solutionsEarly action frequently involves the use of mediation.In 2009 the European Commission and Councildeveloped the concept 'Strengthening EU Mediationand Dialogue Capacities' which provides a basis forincreasing the use of mediation to prevent conflict. EUSpecial Representatives, EU Delegations, and CSDPmissions often undertake mediation with groupsranging from political leaders to local communities,sometimes supported by local civil society groups.

The EU 's Civilian Monitoring Mission to Georgia.Photo Credit: International Crisis Group, CC

4"Out of the depths of authentic prayer comes a longing for peace and a passion for justice."

Gordon Matthews, Quaker Faith & Practice 23.10, Britain Yearly Meeting

CEg3o

There is much more to do. For example, CSDP missionsneed a more detailed understanding of each conflict,including an appreciation of the way men and womenexperience the conflict differently. This meansproperly taking account of the insecurity of womenvis‐à‐vis personal violence, but importantly alsoensuring women are involved in shaping the newpeace. Unfortunately the gender balance of the CSDPmissions sets a poor example: they still include veryfew women in the international staff, particularly at asenior level. The European Peacebuilding LiaisonOffice has recommended that at least 50 per cent ofpeople seconded to staff CSDP missions are women.

Civilian CSDP is undermined bythe European Arms Trade

SDP was on the agenda of the December 2013uropean Council meeting with EU heads ofovernment. In the last edition of Around Europe (No.55, February‐March 2014), QCEA criticised theverwhelming focus of the Council discussion on

defence capabilities and support for the defenceindustry. This focus included a political steer from theCouncil in favour of military technologies, such asRemotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (drones).

According to the Stockholm International PeaceResearch Institutes’s Fifteenth Annual Report onControl of Exports of Military Technology andEquipment, the EU currently spends 274 billion euro onarms – money which could be better spent onresourcing civilian CSDP operations. Whilst EU MemberStates claim not to export arms to countries at war, inpractice, European arms are sold widely to thedetriment of peace. And arms exports into a conflictarea increase the likelihood of conflict by fuellingarms races and strengthening oppressive governmentsinvolved in human rights abuses. European weaponswere used against civilian populations in the MiddleEast and North Africa during the political unrest in2011. They have also been used in Sri Lanka,Columbia, Libya, and Georgia. Sales of small arms toLibya have helped create the need for the current EUCSDP mission in Mali.

Prepare for war, and you get warThe European Union should be preparing for peacethrough the development of civilian CSDP capabilitiesand reducing the production and supply of arms. Toplay a positive role in the world, we must use ourconsiderable global influence to promote a sustainablepeace rather than focusing on short‐term arms sales tocreate profit for arms companies.

It was unfortunate that the Lisbon Treaty committedEU Member States to enhancing their militarycooperation rather than the civilian peacebuildingcapabilities that are more effective at reducingconflict. After gaining vast experience from 30 CSDPmissions, EU Member States now know what is requiredto promote peace. They should refocus theirinvestment onto civilian missions.

Andrew Lane

PhotoCred

it:EU

CSDP,CC

Palestinian Police with motorcycles provided by the EU CSDPmission. Photo Credit: EEAS, CC

EU Member States have enhanced military cooperation

Subscribe to Around EuropeQCEA is an independent organisation and dependson the support of Quakers and other Around Europereaders to be able to be the Quaker voice inEurope. Please consider encouraging others tosubscribe.

Subscription rates for Around Europe from 2014:

Supporter: 100 euro (or £80).

Associate: 50 euro (or £40).

Subscription only: 25 euro (£ 20) for print version or15 euro (£ 10) to receive an electronic copy by e‐mail.

If you are subscribing in the euro zone, pleasecontact the QCEA office; to pay in sterling pleasecontact Simon Bond at simon@armitage.biz; or visithttp://www.qcea.org/home/involved/donate/

Learn more about QCEA's work at www.qcea.org (or email us at office@qcea.org). 5

2014:An Important Moment for Criminal Justice in the EU

EU citizens should be treated equally regardless of which member state they are in.Photo Credit: @European Union 2014 ‐ European Parliament, CC.

Thousands of European Union (EU) citizens faceprosecution or conviction for crimes in an EU MemberState other than their own, each year. Under theStockholm Programme, which sets out the EU’spriorities in the areas of justice, freedom, and securitybetween 2010 and 2014, prisoners have more rightscodified than ever before. However, in the comingyear the EU will face many challenges in setting itsagenda for criminal justice.

In a recent report, the current European Commissionhas expressed its desire to consolidate, codify, andcomplement the framework that is already in place forthe area of justice. The strategy agreed in 2014 willset the benchmark for the next five years, as the EUcontinues to work towards the adoption of laws whichare bolstered by robust enforcement mechanisms at aEuropean, national, and civil society level. And it isimportant that the EU continues to move forward in2014 with the rights of EU citizens at the heart of itsactions.

AchievementsQuakers have a long history of promoting fairnesswithin criminal justice. Quaker concerns for criminaljustice have been honed by the collective experienceof working within and studying criminal justicesystems. The current EU justice area is immeasurablybetter than what came before, due to the pooledsovereignty, mutual cooperation, and goodwill ofmember states. For example, in October 2012, the EUadopted the Directive establishing minimum standardson the rights, support, and protection of victims ofcrime. This includes measures to support families ofvictims, which is a positive step forward in acceptingthe wider social ramifications of crime.

One of the most significant turning points in EU justicepolicy was the 2010 – 2014 Stockholm Programme.According to Fair Trials International, the StockholmProgramme represented a ‘new era for criminal justicepolicy’. Following agreement by all EU Member States,three criminal justice directives have already beenadopted under the Programme, and five more are inthe pipeline. These directives include interpretationand translation for those who do not speak thelanguage used in the criminal proceedings. Anotherensures that clear, prompt information is availablefrom the point of arrest onwards, and a third requiresthat EU citizens have access to legal advice throughoutthe process.

Beyond the consolidation of citizens’ rights duringcriminal proceedings, the Stockholm Programme hasgiven new roles to the European Commission, civilsociety, and national courts. This is to ensure that lawsare implemented consistently across the many diverseEU Member States. The Stockholm Programme hasintroduced new legal tools for the key actors in the EUcriminal justice system, helped to develop minimumstandards for criminal justice across the EU, andpromoted mutual trust in the national justice systems.

2014: Looking forwardIn order to realise the transformation of EU criminaljustice that was envisioned in 2009, more work isneeded. The EU has created many positive policies inthe area of criminal justice. However, creating policyonly goes halfway to ensuring greater rights forcitizens. It is the responsibility of the member statesto put these policies into practice at the nationallevel. 2014 is a crucial year as the Council of theEuropean Union will lay out strategic guidelines for the

6“Coming generations will learn equality from poverty, and love from woes." Khalil Gibran

Aca

period 2014‐2019. Commissioners, including theCommissioner for Justice who will be responsible forcontinuing the important work that was started underthe Stockholm Programme, will be appointed by theCouncil of the EU and must be approved by theEuropean Parliament after the new parliamentariansarrive in Brussels in July.

2014 also marks the end of a five‐year transitionalphase for the area of justice following the Treaty ofLisbon. On 1 December 2014, restrictions to judicialcontrol by the European Court of Justice andCommission over police and judicial cooperation incriminal matters will be lifted. This means theEuropean Commission and European Court of Justicewill be able to launch and pursue legal infringementproceedings against any EU Member State which hasnot correctly implemented a directive in the time limitprovided. Although member states agree to theadoption of frameworks at the EU level, it is up toeach government to implement the directivesnationally.

For example, as of February 2014, fewer than half ofEU Member States had implemented the commonlyagreed rules for people sentenced or awaiting trial inanother country. The European Commission describedthe lack of implementation as ‘regrettable’. Thenumber of EU Member States who have implementedthe three frameworks is very low in comparison todirectives such as the Water Framework Directive andthe Salt Reduction Directive: these have beenimplemented by almost all member states. Thecommonly agreed rules for people sentenced or

awaiting trial in another country enable prisonsentences, probation decisions or alternativesanctions, and pre‐trial supervision measures to beexecuted. On 1 December, the Commission will be ableto begin legal proceedings against the EU MemberStates that have not yet put these laws into force.

From a Quaker perspective, workin criminal justice to ensure

human rights for citizens stemsfrom the deeply held belief thatthere is that of God in every

individual.The only exception to this rule is the United Kingdom,which has chosen to opt out of approximately 130 EUpolice and criminal justice measures. The UKnegotiated the opt‐out clause during the drafting ofthe Lisbon Treaty. No other EU Member State haschosen to opt out of EU criminal justice measures. TheUK’s block opt out will represent another landmark forEU criminal justice in 2014 when it comes into force inJuly. Opting out is not simple: the UK has chosen toopt back into 35 measures that the governmentconsiders will serve UK national interests. Europol, theEuropean Union’s law enforcement agency, has voicedconcerns about the opt out, stating that minimumstandard measures in criminal justice are important interms of ‘levelling the playing field for practitionersand eliminating arbitrary distinctions betweenjurisdictions’. From a Quaker perspective, work incriminal justice to ensure human rights for citizensstems from the deeply held belief that there is that ofGod in every individual. It is important that all EUMember States work together to ensure these rights.

In 2014 the key actors in EU criminal justice have anopportunity to follow through on the groundworkwhich has been already been laid down in the last fiveyears. With stronger enforcement mechanisms thanever before, the European Commission should put asmuch effort into implementing policy as was utilised toadopt it. This will ensure that policy is translated intorights for individuals, which is core to Quaker criminaljustice recommendations. At a national level, eachmember state should work to ensure that EU policy isput into practice effectively and efficiently for thebenefit of all EU citizens.

Rebecca Viney‐Wood

From a Quaker perspective there is that of God withinevery individual.

PhotoCred

it:.V1

ctor

Casale,CC

re you confused by the complex field of candidates for the European Union elections? You can look online orontact your local parties to find out about the candidates and their views. Websites like www.MyVote2014.eund www.votewatch.eu/en/votematch.html can help you find the party that is the best fit for your views.

QUAKER HOUSE NEWS

7We regularly publish short, informal articles on our blog. Why not subscibe via email? Visit

http://qceablog.wordpress.com

Anissa joined QCEA in February 2013 as atranslator for a 3‐month internship as part of herstudies.

She is currently completing a Masters inTranslation at the Institut Libre Marie Haps andhas specialised in European affairs. She istranslating political briefs in the field ofEuropean affairs.

Anissa came to QCEA to experience the Quakerculture, and to introduce herself to the world ofwork. She is a Belgian citizen, a native Frenchspeaker and fluent in both German and English.

Introducing Our Translation Intern: Anissa Diraa

Becky and Chris (third and fourth from the right) with QuakerPeaceworkers, Brussels, March 2014

PhotoCred

it:Claire

Rodg

erson

Anissa Diraa

PhotoCred

it:Gordo

nMatthew

s

1 February: Andrew attended the Annual GeneralMeeting of the Quaker Post‐Yugoslav Peace Link.

3 February: Alexandra joined other NGOs includingEPLO at the annual consultation with the Board ofDirectors of the European Investment Bank andraised a question on further improving their socialand environmental assessments.

11 February: Alexandra participated in a Friends ofthe Earth seminar on the impact of human use onwater, land, carbon, and material (‘fourfootprints’).

February 15: Andrew joined the QCEA BritishCommittee meeting in London. The Committeediscussed a range of issues including the Europeanelections and the QCEA presence at BYM's YearlyMeeting Gathering.

February 17: Alexandra observed the first‐everhearing on a European Citizen’s Initiative (on theright to water).

February 19: Alexandra took part in the AGM of theHuman Rights & Democracy Network.

February 22‐23: Andrew spoke at the Quakers inCriminal Justice Conference at Woodbrooke QuakerStudy Centre in the UK.

March 1‐2: Rebecca and Chris took part in theEuropean Workers Seminar, meeting ProgrammeAssistants from the Quaker United Nations Officeand Peaceworkers from Quaker Peace and SocialWitness.

March 4: Rebecca and Andrew took part in sessions inthe European Parliament on criminal justice,militarism, and the launch of a joint campaign byecumenical groups.

March 5: Chris put questions directly to decisionmakers at the Annual Progressive Economic Forum.

March 19: Rebecca attended the Joint CommitteeMeeting (of national parliaments) on 'FuturePriorities in the field of Civil Liberties, Justice andHome Affairs'.

March 23: Alexandra reported on the work of QCEAat the annual meeting of the Dutch ‘Friends ofBrussels’ support group (VVQREA).

March 31: Chris and Alexandra met colleagues fromthe Quaker United Nations Office to discuss TTIP andinternational trade.

Around EuropeQuaker Council for European AffairsSquare Ambiorix 50, B‐1000, Brussels, Belgium

Around Europe is designed using the open‐source desk‐toppublishing software Scribus.This issue was put together by Rebecca Viney‐Wood

"In order to carry a positive action, we must develop here a positive vision." Dalai Lama

Editeur responsable : Alexandra BosbeerNo. entreprise 0420.346.728www.qcea.orgqceablog.wordpress.com

8

Visit our blog at www.QCEAblog.wordpress.com for recent articles on:

Combating Discrimination in EuropeClimate Change and Energy Use

Israel's Obligations as an Occupying PowerTargeted action needed to tackle racism in European policing?

An Unnecessary Tradition – The Origins of Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)

The European Union (EU) Commission is currently negotiating a comprehensive new Free Trade Agreement(FTA) with the United States of America, known as ‘The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership’ orsimply TTIP.

Currently, negotiators are planning to include an Investor‐State DisputeSettlement clause, or ISDS, which would allow corporate organisationsto take legal actions against governments in international arbitrationcourts over legislation that damages, or even just potentially damages,corporate profit.

This ISDS could have a significant negative impact on the well‐being of citizens on both sides of the Atlanticthrough a weakening of democratic institutions. On 27th March 2014 the EU Commission opened a publicconsultation on ISDS, asking citizens to put forward their opinions within the next three months. QCEA willbe putting in submissions, and those signed up to our action alerts will receive our submission which youcan use it to form your own response to the questions.

You can:

*Submit a response directly to the European Commissionhttp://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch?form=ISDS

*Sign up for QCEA action alerts to receive this and other calls to action on topics of your choice(see http://www.qcea.org/home/involved/action‐alerts/ or write to Gordon at office@qcea.org)

*Read more about ISDS on the QCEA blog onhttp://qceablog.wordpress.com/category/economic‐justice/

Call for Action –Tell the Commission What You Think!