Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The end of organised crime in the European Union

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

So much has been written—and vigorously contested—about ‘organised crime’ (OC) that the impending fall of this familiar icon may come as a shock, both to its detractors and to those who take it for granted. Yet that moment may be upon us, for reasons that this paper will explore, as the European Union shifts the vocabulary within which policies on police cooperation are articulated. A pivot of this change is the EU Council Decision on Europol, first debated by the Council in late 2006 and anticipated as applying from 2010 onwards. This will shift the scope of Europol’s work from ‘organised crime’ (attributing qualities to criminality) to ‘serious crime’ (concern with impacts and harms falling on individual and collective victims); will transfer financing of Europol to the Community budget; and so will initiate parliamentary scrutiny. These issues in security governance are explored from ‘northern’, ‘southern’ and ‘eastern’ European perspectives and in the contexts of ongoing enlargement and democratisation of the EU.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The list of crimes referred to by the Europol Decision (pp 52-53) is as follows: participation in a criminal organisation, terrorism, trafficking in human beings, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives, corruption, fraud, including that affecting the financial interests of the European Communities within the meaning of the Convention of 26 July 1995 on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests, laundering of the proceeds of crime, counterfeiting currency, including of the Euro, computer-related crime, environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties, facilitation of unauthorised entry and residence, murder, grievous bodily injury, illicit trade in human organs and tissue, kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking, racism and xenophobia, organised or armed robbery, illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art, swindling, racketeering and extortion, counterfeiting and piracy of products, forgery of administrative documents and trafficking therein, forgery of means of payment, illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters, illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials, trafficking in stolen vehicles, rape, arson, crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, unlawful seizure of aircraft/ships, sabotage.

  2. The 2006 Organised Crime Threat Assessment of Europol puts it this way: ‘The model adopted in this threat assessments points to the types of OC groups that must be regarded as the most dangerous […] the focus should be on OC groups displaying structural or functional qualities supporting the resistance of these groups to dismantling attempts. [...] The main threatening aspects of the groups are, first, the overwhelming obstacles in dismantling them because of their international dimension or influence, and second, their level of infiltration in society and economy’[14].

  3. In a similar vein, the present author recalls a discussion with a senior UK police officer who, gesturing to the world outside the window, described the agency as being continuously ‘under attack’ (and he did not mean by civil liberty critics). The point for present purposes is that, should sophisticated crime groups succeed in seriously degrading the ability of a police agency to function, then the priorities of that agency could be regarded as somewhat moot. The survival instinct predisposes policing agencies and their ministries (where neither corrupt nor constrained by other political priorities) to attend first and foremost to those criminals and their allies having the highest ability to neutralise policing. In this perspective, considerations of other harms become secondary.

  4. As the Home Office Minster put it, possibly evading the main matter of principle involved in private-public data exchange: ‘At present there are no formal agreements between Europol and public or private entities relating to the provision of commercial data to Europol. However, the Government's view is that where that would involve the processing of personal data from public or private entities, it must take place exclusively via the Europol national units. A new legal instrument to regulate Europol's activities [the Council Decision] is currently under negotiation in the Justice and Home Affairs Council. In the context of that negotiation, the question of the provision of commercial data to Europol has yet to be discussed.’ [21]

  5. van Duyne, P., 2008, personal communication.

References

  1. Chatham House International Law discussion group (2007). Anti-Corruption Obligations and the UK System of Prosecution: a summary of the Chatham House International Law discussion group meeting held on 30 April. London: Royal Institute of International Affairs. www.chathamhouse.org.uk/publications/papers/download/-/id/486/file/9830_il300407.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  2. Council of the European Union (2002). Initiative of the Kingdom of Denmark with a view to adopting a Council Act drawing up, on the basis of Article 43(1) of the Convention on the Establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), of a Protocol amending that Convention. 10307/02, EUROPOL 46, 2 July. Brussels: Council of the European Union. http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/02/st10/10307en2.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  3. Council of the European Union (2003). Council Act drawing up, on the basis of Article 43(1) of the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention), a Protocol amending that Convention. 13650/03, EUROPOL 53. Brussels: Council of the European Union. http://www.statewatch.org/news/2007/jan/europol-third-protocol-2003.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  4. Council of the European Union (2007). Brussels European Council 21/22 June 2007: Presidency Conclusions, 23 June. 11177/07, CONCL 2. Brussels: European Council. See especially Annex I: Draft IGC Mandate, p 15 onwards. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/94932.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  5. Dubourg, R., & Prichard, S. (2007). The impact of organised crime in the UK: revenues and economic and social costs. In Home Office (Ed.), Organised crime: revenues, economic and social costs, and criminal assets available for seizure. Home Office Online Report 14/07. London: Home Office (withdrawn summer 2007 from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/orgcrime1.html, revised version awaited).

  6. Edwards, A., & Gill, P., Eds. (2003). Transnational Organised Crime: The Policy and Politics of Global Crime. London: Routledge.

  7. Eurojust (2007). Eurojust held co-ordination meeting on JAS Gripen jetfighters case, press announcement, 10 May. The Hague: Eurojust. http://eurojust.europa.eu/press_releases/2007/10-05-2007.htm. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  8. European Commission (2006a). Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European Police Office (EUROPOL), presented by the Commission SEC(2006) 1682 & SEC(2006) 1683. Brussels: European Council. http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/07/st05/st05055.en07.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  9. European Commission (2006b). Commission Staff Working Document: Accompanying document to the Proposal for a Council Decision Establishing the European Police Office (Europol): Impact Assessment, COM(2006) 817 final, SEC(2006) 1683. Brussels: European Union. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=41995A1127(01)&model=guichett. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  10. European Commission (2007). Bulgaria and Romania make progress but much remains to be done to tackle judicial reform and corruption. IP/07/948, 27 June. Brussels: European Commission. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/948&format=PDF&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  11. European Parliament (2002). Report on the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of Spain with a view to adopting a Council Act drawing up a Protocol amending the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A5-2002-0173&language=CS&mode=XML. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  12. European Parliament (2007). Working Document on the establishment of the European Police Office (Europol), Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Rapporteur: Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra. DT\652813EN.doc, PE 384.579v01-00, 19.2.2007. Brussels: EP. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/dt/652/652813/652813en.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  13. European Union (1995). Europol Convention: Convention based on Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the establishment of a European Police Office, Official Journal of the European Communities. C 316, 27/11/1995, 0002-0032. http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/doc_centre/police/europol/wai/doc_police_europol_en.htm. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  14. Europol (2006). European Union Organised Crime Threat Assessment 2007. The Hague: Europol. http://www.europol.europa.eu/publications/European_Organised_Crime_Threat_Assessment_(OCTA)/OCTA2006.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  15. Europol (2007). European Union Organised Crime Threat Assessment 2007. The Hague: Europol. http://www.europol.europa.eu/publications/European_Organised_Crime_Threat_Assessment_(OCTA)/OCTA2007.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  16. Europol Working Party (2007). Outcome of proceedings on 18 and 19 January 2007. Europol 10. Doc 5560/07. Brussels: Council of the European Union. http://www.statewatch.org/news/2007/jan/europol-5560-07.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  17. Fatić, A. (2004). The criminal syndicate as para-state in the Balkans: is the ‘New War-Making Criminal Entity’ a reality? South-East Europe Review, 4, 137–156.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fijnaut, C. (2002). Introduction to the special issue on police accountability in Europe. Policing and Society, 12(4), 243–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Financial Times (editorial comment) (2007). Department of Justice is right to investigate BAE Systems. London: Financial Times, 27 June. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/9e9a7c62-24e0-11dc-bf47-000b5df10621.html. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  20. Frisby, T. (1998). The Rise of Organised Crime in Russia: its Roots and Social Significance. Europe-Asia Studies, 50(1), 27–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hiller, M. (2007). Hansard (House of Commons Daily Debates), 4 July, Column 1046W. London: House of Commons. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmhansrd.htm. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  22. Hillyard, P., Pantazis, C., Tombs, S., & Gordon, D., Eds. (2004). Beyond Criminology: Taking Harm Seriously. London: Pluto Press.

  23. Home Office/ Brand, S., & Price, R. (2000). The economic and social costs of crime, Research Study 217. London: Home Office, Economics and Resource Analysis. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hors217.pdf. Accessed 13 September 2008.

  24. House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee (2001). European Scrutiny, Third Report, Possible amendments to the Europol Convention and possible extensions of Europol’s mandate. HC 152-iii. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmeuleg/152-iii/15215.htm. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  25. House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee (2007). Seventeenth Report of Session 2006-07. Documents considered by the Committee on 18 April. HC 41-xvii, London: The Stationery Office Limited. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmeuleg/41-xxi/4106.htm. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  26. House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee (2007). Third Report, Justice and Home Affairs Issues at European Union Level. HC 76-I, 5 June. London: The Stationery Office Limited. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmhaff/76/76i.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  27. Loader, I., & Walker, N. (2006). Necessary virtue: the legitimate place of the State in the production of security. In J. Wood, & B. Dupont (Eds.), Democracy, Society and the Governance of Security (pp. 165–195). Cambridge: CUP.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2007). LOCDE va procéder à un nouvel examen des efforts de lutte contre la corruption du Royaume-Uni (OECD to conduct a further examination of UK efforts against bribery), Paris: OECD. http://www.oecd.org/document/51/0,3343,en_2649_201185_38253619_1_1_1_1,00.html. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  29. Peers, S. (2007). Europol: The final step in the creation of anInvestigative and OperationalEuropean Police Force. Statewatch analysis. London: Statewatch. http://www.statewatch.org/news/2007/jan/europol-analysis.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  30. Savona, E. et al. (2008). IKOC, Improving Knowledge on Organised Crime to develop a common European approach, Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam, ISBN number 978-90-79757-01-5 (in press).

  31. Sheptycki, J. (2004). Organizational Pathologies in Police Intelligence Systems: Some Contributions to the Lexicon of Intelligence-led Policing. European Journal of Criminology, 1(3), 307–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Shearing, C. (2006). Reflections on the refusal to acknowledge private governments. In J. Wood, & B. Dupont (Eds.), Democracy, Society and the Governance of Security (pp. 10–32). Cambridge: CUP.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Serious Organised Crime Agency (2005). Management Statement for the Serious Organised Crime Agency. London: SOCA. http://www.soca.gov.uk/downloads/Management_Statement_&Financial_Memorandum_2005.pdf. Accessed 12 September 2008.

  34. Van Duyne, P., Maljevic, A., van Dijck, M., von Lampe, K., & Newell, J. (2006). The organisation of crime for profit: conduct, law and measurement. Nijmegen: Wolf.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Woodiwiss, M. (2003). Transnational Organised Crime: the Global Reach of an American Concept. In A., Edwards, & P. Gill (Eds.),Transnational Organised Crime: The Policy and Politics of Global Crime. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Dorn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dorn, N. The end of organised crime in the European Union. Crime Law Soc Change 51, 283–295 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-008-9156-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-008-9156-y

Keywords

Navigation