Environmental crime proposal draws controversy[fr][de] 

The proposed directive "establishes a minimum set of serious environmental offences that should be considered criminal throughout the Community when committed intentionally or with at least serious negligence. Participation in and instigation of such activities should equally be considered a criminal offence. The offences should be punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal sanctions for natural persons, whereas criminal or non-criminal sanctions shall be applied to legal persons."

The proposal also states that "majority of the offences are made conditional on the activities' result, i.e. that they cause or are likely to cause serious harm to persons or the environment". 

Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini  said: "The aim is to ensure that safe havens for environmental crime will no longer exist within the European Union."

And European Environmental Bureau Vice-President Mauro Albrizio told EurActiv: "It's an important step in the right direction. It has never been more urgent than now to have EU rules in place that require member states to provide criminal sanctions, since only these types of measures are adequate and dissuasive enough to achieve proper and effective implementation of environmental law. What the Union needs is a Community level playing field that obliges member states to adopt criminal sanctions aimed at ensuring that EU environmental laws are strictly enforced. 

Surprising support came from UK Conservative environment spokeswoman MEP Caroline Jackson, who seemingly announced a Tory turnabout on the issue: "It's time that the right to a clean and safe environment is respected in a uniform and effective way in all 27 EU members. Experience has shown that the sanctions currently established are not sufficient to achieve full compliance with Community environmental law. For instance, during the past ten years more than 250,000 breaches of environmental legislation have been registered in Italy, and the turnover of 'ecomafia business' in Italy was approximately €22 billion in 2005."

But European Parliament Conservative leader Timothy Kirkhope MEP  warned Labour not to "cede key powers to the European Commission over criminal law".

"I fear that the Commission sees this as an oppotrunity to extend its powers and start interfering in the criminal law of member states. Notwithstanding our suppotr for environmental protection, this is a blow to Britain's ability to decide things for ourselves."

A view backed by UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, who was not impressed with the final draft proposal: "This is a clear extension of the Commission's competence. It decides whether or not an act should be a criminal or civil case. It does not seem to have crossed their minds that some countries have a legal tradition that stretches back to time immemorial and which is perfectly capable of making up its own mind on these matters.

"Not only that once this principle is accepted is it a short step for the Commission to set up minimum penal tariffs in a whole range of areas that should be properly left to the democratically accountable national Parliaments.

Despite the fact that the proposal states "...several offences contain relatively vague terms such as "substantial damage" or "serious injury". Those terms are not defined and their appraisal is left to each Member State to interpret in the light of its traditions and legal system", Farage remained unconvinced.

"It is said that no Parliament can bind a future Parliament - this Directive drives a coach and horses through this key democratic principle. This is exactly like Soviet Russia."