Viviane Reding, the EU Justice Commissioner, gave a speech to the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe highlighting key justice initiatives. She discussed proposals to streamline civil justice procedures like contract law, debt recovery, and judgments to facilitate business growth. Reding also addressed strengthening procedural rights for suspects, reforming the European Arrest Warrant, and establishing minimum standards for crime victims. The goal is to build an area of justice that meets the needs of EU citizens and businesses in the post-Lisbon Treaty era.

1. SPEECH/11/371
Viviane Reding
Vice-President of the European Commission, EU Justice
Commissioner
Moving Justice centre-stage
Plenary session of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of
Europe (CCBE)
Luxembourg, 21 May 2011

2. Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great pleasure for me to be taking part in your plenary this morning.
I am conscious that I am the first Commissioner with dedicated responsibilities for
the Justice portfolio. That brings with it the need to understand the concerns of the
legal profession. In that respect, the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe
is a most valued organisation, bringing together Europe's different legal
professions to promote law and justice. Your members are working on the front-line
of the day-to-day delivery of justice, working both with Europe's citizens and with
Europe's businesses. Your insights, and concerns, are therefore invaluable to me
in my work to give flesh and substance to core principles like "access to justice"
and "mutual recognition" which lie at the heart of the Commission's agenda for the
coming years.
I do not forget also the important role that the legal profession has played in the
development of the European Union, a construction built entirely on the rule of law.
Without the contribution of your members, seeking to assert the rights of their
clients, the European Union would most certainly be a very different entity, far
removed from its citizens and businesses.
The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty gives us now a very special opportunity to
shape the area of justice in a way that is responsive to the real needs of those
using it. The Lisbon Treaty moved the Justice agenda centre-stage.
Your conference programme reflects the importance of reform in the area of civil
justice. The aim of this reform process is twofold: firstly, it will help Europe recover
from the economic and financial crisis. Secondly, new proposals on civil justice
adapt our legal systems to a changing reality in our societies. 12 million European
citizens live in a Member State other than their own, growing numbers of citizens
live in a bi-national marriage or partnership, some people own a holiday home
abroad, and a number of Member States have introduced registered partnerships
while others have not done so. People shop across borders, both on- and offline,
or they inherit property in another Member State than the one they live in. There
are many situations in the life of a European that can get terribly complicated
because it is unclear which law applies if something goes wrong or if the civil status
of a person changes. This is not only a challenge for citizens but also for
businesses.
Justice for growth
With our upcoming measures in the area of contract law, debt recovery or the
recent proposal on the cross-border recognition of judgments in commercial
matters (Brussels I) we want to make it easier to do business in the Single Market.
We call it Justice for Growth.
We must play our part in the justice area to lighten the regulatory burden, give legal
certainty to companies, and to protect consumers. All of this will speed up the exit
from the financial and economic crisis, and will enable both consumers and
businesses to make use of the opportunities the Single Market offers.
Civil Justice
Take for example the revision of the Brussels I Regulation, aimed at removing
extra costs and legal uncertainty faced by citizens and businesses.
2

3. The major reform we are proposing is the abolition of the "exequatur" procedure for
the cross-border recognition of judgments in civil and commercial matters. On an
EU average, exequatur costs € 2.200 in a straightforward case, and at up to 12
months it can be lengthy, too. Exequatur is thus in most cases an unnecessary, yet
expensive formality.
The Brussels I reform will also benefit international litigation. We are proposing
changes aimed at an efficient protection of the choice of court and arbitration
agreements in the Union.
We know that the overwhelming majority of EU businesses involved in cross-border
trade make use of choice of court agreements. The evaluation of the Regulation
had shown that such agreements can be circumvented too easily under current
rules and that this creates unnecessary litigation, thus triggering costs and delays
for businesses. The changes we are proposing will enhance the effectiveness of
such agreements and will better ensure respect for party autonomy.
Similarly, we are proposing changes to strengthen the effect of arbitration
agreements in Europe. Our studies have shown that parties can effectively obstruct
arbitration agreements by shopping around in Europe trying to get the agreement
declared invalid. This creates again unnecessary litigation, leading to extra costs
and delays. As a result of the proposed changes, the risk for parallel proceedings
will be removed, abusive litigation tactics will be countered and no irreconcilable
decisions will circulate in Europe.
Another important initiative will be on cross border debt recovery. I will present in
July a legislative proposal to facilitate cross-border debt recovery through better
enforcement. It will be a new self-standing European procedure available to
citizens and companies in addition to existing national procedures.
The aim is to enable a creditor to preserve, as security for the debt owed, money
held by his debtor in one or several bank accounts within the territory of the
European Union. The proposal will contribute to the recovery of a proportion of bad
debt, to the reduction of cost and to simplification in judicial proceedings. It will
bring legal certainty to cross-border trade and inspire confidence and payment
morale.
Let me turn to the recent initiatives on family law, important elements of justice
for citizens.
In March, the Commission adopted two proposals on matrimonial property regimes
and on property consequences of registered partnerships. It was high time the EU
acted because there are more and more couples living in a Member State of which
they do not have nationality, or they acquire property in another Member State than
the one they live in.
In total, there are around 16 million such international couples across the EU. Of
2.4 million marriages celebrated in the EU in 2007, about 300 000 involved more
than one nationality. Around one fifth of registered partnerships in the EU has an
international dimension.
The two proposals aim to provide clear rules for international couples and offer
legal certainty as regards their property rights, in particular when the couple splits
by divorce, separation or when one of the members of the couple dies. The
proposals do not intervene in any way into the recognition or legal definition of the
institutions concerned.
3

4. The proposals are a logical step forward, implementing the principle of mutual
recognition in the family law area. They sit alongside the long-standing Brussels IIa
Regulation on the jurisdiction and recognition of decisions in matrimonial matters. I
also proposed the first measure of enhanced cooperation which provides rules to
determine the applicable divorce law. This enabled a breakthrough in the form of
the Rome III Regulation, adopted last December. Finally, we have also the
proposal on successions under the negotiations that is relevant for the situations of
dissolving a marriage or partnership.
All these measures have one thing in common: they seek to simplify the lives of
citizens in cross-border situations. The last thing anyone needs in one of these
difficult moments is to be faced with unnecessarily complex legal questions.
Criminal Law
I will now turn to criminal law, an area which also features prominently on your
conference agenda.
First of all, I would like to thank the Council of the Bars and Law Societies for the
close and fruitful cooperation on procedural rights going back 10 years. And I
remember with fondness addressing the 50th anniversary of the CCBE last
November and see for myself that, like me, you are pleased with the progress we
have made on procedural rights. A first directive on the right to interpretation and
translation in criminal proceedings was adopted last October. We are well on our
way to the adoption of the second item on the procedural rights Roadmap, a
Directive on the right to information in criminal proceedings. This means that the
information on rights will be given in writing, in a "Letter of Rights" and includes, of
course, the fact that they are entitled to a lawyer. Our research shows that in half of
the Member States, in 50% of cases, the accused person does not have a lawyer.
Is this because they don't know their rights? Surely this plays a part. The Letter of
Rights will make sure that everyone knows they are entitled to a lawyer. The
second part of the draft Directive, on access to information about the charge, was
something that lawyers in the CCBE have been advocating for many years. I know
that the CCBE will be particularly interested in the Directive on access to a lawyer,
which I will be proposing next month. You, and your members, have made
recommendations to the Commission as to the content of the proposal. Your expert
guidance has been much appreciated.
European Arrest Warrant
The Commission has recently reported on the implementation of the European
Arrest Warrant system which has now been operational for over seven years. Our
report provides an opportunity to take stock of both its successes and
shortcomings. There is general agreement that Europe needs a robust and
effective extradition system to ensure serious cross-border crime is prosecuted and
punished with minimum delay. I am of the view that the European arrest warrant
has provided such a system successfully. However, we should also flag up some of
the system's shortcomings and take into consideration the fact that the
Commission has been listening to stakeholders such as the CCBE, whose
members have valuable experience of the system in practice.
Improvement of the European arrest warrant system is directly linked to continuing
to build mutual trust in Member States' judicial systems, without which judicial co-
operation cannot work. Arrest warrant issues have therefore informed the
Commission’s ongoing work on the procedural rights of suspected or accused
persons in criminal proceedings.
4

5. This is why the Commission calls for a proportionality check to be applied in the
state issuing the arrest warrant taking into account such issues as the seriousness
of the offence, the length of the sentence, and a cost/benefit analysis of the
execution of the warrant, This is an issue I will keep under review and re-visit in
accordance with the evidence, including that provided by interested parties such as
the CCBE. I hope I can count on your expertise for the continued improvement of
the European Arrest Warrant.
Victims of Crime
I have already spoken of the rights of the defence but as you know every crime has
a victim and every victim must have a voice and central role. That is why we are
also taking action to strengthen the rights of victims of crime.
I have a simple vision – that victims are recognised, that their role in the criminal
justice system is recognised, that their suffering is recognised and that their needs
are met – they should be at the heart of the criminal justice system. It is odd that
victims of crime are so peripheral to the system that seeks to defend them.
This means changing cultures and attitudes – our justice systems have not been
designed with the victim in mind – they have been focussed on prosecuting the
offender and defending society.
This approach is reflected in the treatment of victims. The European Union has in
the past taken action in this area through the 2001 Council Framework Decision on
the standing of victims. As a result Member States have acted to varying degrees.
But at the end of the day, across the EU, people who have fallen victim to crime –
up to 75 million every year, not to mention their families – are not having their
needs met.
This is why I presented on 18 May a Directive establishing minimum standards for
victims and a Regulation to ensure the protection they benefit from is not lost when
they move abroad.
We must ensure that victims are better recognised and treated with respect and
dignity. We must ensure they are better protected from intimidation, repeat
victimisation and secondary victimisation during proceedings. Victims will have
better access to quality support and better access to justice both in a formal setting
and through mediation and other forms of restorative justice.
Importantly, our action respects the right of the defence to a fair trial. Raising
standards for victims will enable fairer justice across Europe without lowering the
rights of the defence.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have given you an overview of the most important initiatives this year, which will
help us accelerating Europe's exit from the economic and financial crisis, advance
procedural rights, and build a comprehensive area of justice for our citizens and
businesses. I know that I can count on your continued support and expertise to
take this agenda forward. The Treaty of Lisbon has put Justice centre-stage. With
your support we will ensure that the Justice agenda comes of age.
Thank you.
5