Annexes to COM(2020)187 - Implementation of Directive 2011/99/EU on the European protection order - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2020)187 - Implementation of Directive 2011/99/EU on the European protection order. |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2020)187  |
| date | May 11, 2020 |
One Member State has not transposed this obligation.
4.Data collection
To facilitate the evaluation of its application, the Directive provides that Member States must communicate to the Commission relevant data related to the application of national procedures on the EPOs, at least on the number of EPOs requested, issued and/or recognised (Article 22). In addition, Member States are invited to provide other types of data, such as, for example, the types of crimes concerned (Recital 32).
Two questionnaires were sent to Member States requesting the above-mentioned information, respectively by 1 September 2017 (for the years 2015 to mid-2017 9 ) and by 11 March 2019 (for the years 2015-2018).
19 Member States replied to the questionnaire sent in 2017 and/or to the one sent in 2019. 3 of the 19 replied only to the questionnaire sent in 2017. The other 16 Member States provided updated information in 2019.
Statistics provided by Member States and compiled for the years 2015-2018 record a total of 37 EPOs issued. According to the questionnaire replies, the majority of reported EPOs were issued by a single Member State (27 out of 37). Two other Member States also reported having issued EPOs. From the information available, only 15 EPOs were recognised and led to the adoption of protection measure(s) in the executing State (4 in 2015, 5 in 2016, 3 for the first half of 2017, and 3 in 2017-2018). Finally, 10 Member States reported that they have neither issued nor recognised any EPOs.
A few Member States have examples of good practices of case management systems, some of which include registration of EPOs.
5.Conclusion
The national implementing provisions received from all the 26 Member States bound by the Directive seem to be satisfactory overall, especially regarding the mechanism for recognising EPOs. Transposing provisions are sufficient to enable the issuance and recognition of EPOs in all Member States but one.
The analysis of the practical application of the Directive shows however that it has not yet reached its full potential, as shown by the low number of EPOs issued and executed. According to the information available to the Commission, only 37 EPOs were issued and only 15 were executed. The national authorities competent for issuing EPOs are not fully aware of the possibilities for doing so. Moreover, persons in need of protection may not be fully aware of the possibility to request a EPO.
The implementation of some provisions of the Directive, such as the obligation to inform, should be improved in some Member States.
Some Member States do not envisage any sanctions for a breach of a measure adopted in recognition of a EPO. This may have a deterrent effect on potential requests for this form of cross-border protection.
The wide variety of protection measures available in the Member States (under civil, administrative or criminal proceedings) may be another reason why the EPO remains under-used.
The Commission will continue to assess Member States’ compliance with the Directive and will take appropriate measures to ensure conformity with its provisions throughout the Union. If necessary, the Commission will open infringement proceedings against Member States which are not in compliance with the Directive.
At the same time the Commission is working closely with Member States to overcome the difficulties in implementing the Directive. In particular, the Commission is promoting, notably through financial support the effective application of national protection orders, by raising awareness and stressing the need to train practitioners about the availability of the EPO 10 .
(1) Regulation (EU) No 606/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters, OJ L 181, 29.6.2013, p. 4–12.
(2) Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57–73.
(3) Report on the implementation of Directive 2011/99/EU on the European protection order (2016/2329(INI)), 14 March 2018), https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0065_EN.html
(4) European protection order Study, EPRS, PE 603.272, September 2017, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/603272/EPRS_STU(2017)603272_EN.pdf
(5) Criminal procedural laws across the European Union — A comparative analysis of selected main differences and the impact they have over the development of EU legislation, PE 604.977, August 2018, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604977/IPOL_STU(2018)604977_EN.pdf
(6) The report includes the UK as the assessment covers both the time when it was an EU Member State and part of the transition period during which the Directive applies in the UK.
(7) https://www.ejn-crimjust.europa.eu/ejn/libcategories.aspx?Id=85
(8) This applies in case of a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA on probation measures and alternative sanctions, or a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA
(9) 30 June 2017
(10) Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a Justice Programme for the period 2014 to 2020, OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 73–83