EU internal security governance: the case of counter-terrorism

Abstract

There are clear indicators that in spite of the sensitivity of internal security in terms of essential state functions and national sovereignty an EU governance framework with specific characteristics has emerged in the counter-terrorism field. Common threat assessments guide governance responses, and specific institutional structures, cooperation mechanisms, legal instruments, and forms of external action have been put into place to respond to the cross-border nature of the terrorist challenges. However, in line with the general subsidiary role only of the EU as provider of internal security in addition to the Member States, this governance framework remains based on the interaction and cooperation between national counter-terrorist systems and capabilities that remain largely under national control and still enjoy relatively wide margins of discretion in terms of priorities, legal framework, and organization. This analysis concludes that the EU's internal security governance – as evident from the counter-terrorism field – may be best characterized as an advanced institutionalized system of cooperation and coordination between national governance frameworks constructed around a core of common instruments and procedures with a cross-border reach.

Keywords:

• European Union
• internal security
• counter-terrorism

Notes on contributors

Professor and Rector, College of Europe (Bruges/Natolin); previous positions: Professor of Contemporary European Studies, Sussex European Institute, University of Sussex; Holder of the Marie Curie Chair of Excellence in EU Internal Security Governance at the Robert-Schuman-University, Strasbourg; Co-Director of the Sussex European Institute, University of Sussex; Professor and Director of the Centre for European Politics and Institutions, University of Leicester; Director of the Institut für Europäische Politik, Bonn/Berlin.

Notes

1. « conditions essentielles de l'exercice de la souveraineté nationale » ; Conseil constitutionnel, Décision n° 92-308 DC du 09 avril 1992, reaffirmed in subsequent decisions on EU treaty reforms regarding the AFSJ.

2. Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security.

3. Bulletin of the European Communities 11-1975, p. 9.

4. Title VI TEU.

5. See the list defined in Article 83(1) TFEU.

6. This in accordance with the arrangements laid down by the ‘Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality’.

7. Formerly – until 2012 – the Joint Situation Centre (SitCen).

8. Council Regulation (EC) 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 – with subsequent amendments.

9. The official ‘Consolidated list of persons, groups and entities subject to EU financial sanctions’ is regularly updated and can be consulted at http://eeas.europa.eu/cfsp/sanctions/consol-list_en.htm.

10. Proposed by a group of seven Member States in April 2010 (Council of the European Union 2010b).

11. Now replaced by Article 13 of the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters which entered into force in 2005.