5 Dec 2011 : Column 87
Each
of the victims had a story to tell about the Kafkaesque operation of
the European arrest warrant. In none of those cases have any alleged
crimes been upheld, and in this country I believe that we still call
that innocent. In the case of Michael Turner, a business man accused of
defrauding administration fees in Hungary, six years after the alleged
offence took place Hungarian prosecutors have still not even charged him
with any crime whatever. That warrant was a fishing expedition—no more,
no less. If we do not put in place some basic check as the tide of
warrants rises, there will be more of those injustices. The case for
reform is overwhelming and the starting point should be the
recommendations of the Joint Committee. No one is talking about tearing
up the European arrest warrant altogether; we are talking about adding
some safeguards enumerated in the report. If we do not put some basic
checks in place, we are inviting worse to come.
To
answer my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton,
according the EU Council Secretariat Britain now receives a third of all
European arrest warrants, four times more than France and 15 times more
than Poland. The number of surrenders is rising. In 2004, 5 British
citizens were surrendered in a year, but last year the figure rose to
one a week. The case for reform is clear. We must put in place some
basic checks so that we can ensure that the innocent are not swept along
with those whom we of course want brought to justice.
It
is important to stress that no one is suggesting that we should let
criminals go free. We want the introduction of basic safeguards. They
might add a small delay in some cases, but they will not prevent a
single criminal being brought to justice. Let us be crystal clear that
there is no law enforcement dividend from selling out the innocent. The
motion before us calls on the Government to introduce legislation to
remedy the situation. Of course Parliament cannot tie its own hands. The
JCHR recommendations should be the benchmark and any legislation must
go through proper scrutiny procedures.
At
the international level, the motion calls on the Government to pursue
renegotiation of the arrangements with our American and European
partners. The legislature is not demanding the impossible of the
Executive. I hope that the Opposition will support us in this. The
Leader of the Opposition has strenuously made the case, with regard to
civil liberties, that:
“We
should always take the greatest care in protecting them… too often we
seemed casual about them. I won’t let the Tories or the Liberals take
ownership of the British tradition of liberty.”
should always take the greatest care in protecting them… too often we
seemed casual about them. I won’t let the Tories or the Liberals take
ownership of the British tradition of liberty.”
Those are fine words that he will be held to this evening.
I
acknowledge the work of the Baker review. Judges and lawyers can give
their legal opinions, but ultimately it is Members of this House, as
elected law makers, who will decide. Each of us bears the responsibility
to protect the liberty of our citizens and defend British justice, and I
commend the motion to the House.
