López López, Andrés
Fernández Sola, Natividad (dir.)
Universidad de Zaragoza,
2022
Resumen: Con el Tratado de la Unión Europea y, más concretamente, con la instauración del Espacio Schengen, los ciudadanos (Maastricht, 1992) vimos incrementada la posibilidad de viajar y de asentarnos libremente en el territorio interior que deseáramos, sin controles fronterizos para el cruce entre países del ES. Las personas de buena fe harían esto con la finalidad de encontrar una vida mejor, o quizás diferente, a la que venían llevando en sus países de origen. O, en caso de los extranjeros asentados en un país de Schengenland, poder comenzar de nuevo en otro Estado parte. Pero esta falta de control interno entre algunos Estados (todos ellos soberanos, no lo olvidemos) también ha supuesto una merma en la seguridad interior, tanto en el seno de la Unión Europea como para el resto de los países que, sin ser parte de esta, decidieron establecer la libertad de movimiento entre sus territorios y algunos Estados de la UE (Suiza, Liechtenstein, Islandia o Noruega). Para combatir y paliar esta falta de seguridad intrafronteriza y que la delincuencia organizada de todos los ámbitos: terrorismo, tráfico de drogas, tráfico de personas, tráfico de armas, de vehículos, etc., pudiese ser detectada y posteriormente juzgada y penada, fuese cual fuese el país interior en el que se estableciesen u operasen, se inventaron los mecanismos de cooperación policial (y judicial: Eurojust-Fiscalía Europea) que actualmente existen en el Espacio de Libertad, Seguridad y Justicia (ELSJ). Las agencias descentralizadas y las oficinas de seguridad de la UE juegan aquí su papel, clave en este entramado delincuencial. Pero no solo existen este tipo de organismos de cooperación policial internacional, como Europol, Frontex, OLAF o Sirene, sino que desde el Convenio de Aplicación del Acuerdo de Schengen (CAAS) ha visto la luz otro canal de intercambio de información que complementa a estas agencias y oficinas y que actúan como auténticos actores en la esfera internacional: los Centros de Cooperación Policial y Aduanera, o como se les conoce por sus siglas, CCPA. ¿Eran necesarios más instrumentos para combatir la delincuencia, además de los ya oficialmente establecidos por las Instituciones de la UE? Los Estados decidieron que sí, ya que ninguno de los existentes hasta ese momento combatía in situ la delincuencia transnacional que operaba en las zonas fronterizas comunes. Para ello, a través de convenios suscritos ad referéndum entre los ministros de interior de los países con frontera terrestre común que así lo decidiesen, y en base a la habilitación que les conferían los artículos 39 puntos 4 y 5 y 46 del CAAS, estos mecanismos de cooperación policial (y en su caso, aduanera) pasaban a ser una realidad y a establecerse los cuerpos policiales (y de nuevo, aduaneros) que los países decidiesen, en un mismo entorno físico, como si de una comisaría de policía se tratase pero con miembros de todas las Fuerzas y Cuerpos de Seguridad de los países signatarios. Lo que en un principio se llamaron Comisarías Conjuntas, que no dejaban de ser un puesto fronterizo común (período pre-Schengen) en las dos décadas siguientes a la instauración del primer CCPA, se habían superado todas las expectativas iniciales, siendo en la actualidad más de 60 Centros Cooperativos Policiales los que han proliferado por las fronteras interiores de la UE, por el Espacio Schengen y por las fronteras exteriores que estos Estados comparten con terceros países. Incluso estos Terceros Estados los han copiado para sí en sus fronteras comunes, bajo la supervisión de la UE, ya sea a través de Europol o de los países que han fomentado y animado a estos países a establecerlos (como la labor realizada por Alemania con los fondos ISEC-FSI en la Península Balcánica). Se crea así un canal más de intercambio de información utilizando las herramientas que la UE pone a su disposición: además del CAAS, la también conocida como Iniciativa Sueca o el Convenio de Prüm, principalmente. Estos y otros acuerdos internacionales en materia de cooperación policial van a permitir a los CCPAs expandirse más allá de la idea inicial para lo que en un principio fueron creados (así lo reconoce la Comisión en su última propuesta del año 2021 al Consejo y al Parlamento Europeo de modificación de la Iniciativa Sueca), habiendo llegado a constituirse en una herramienta tan eficaz como los instaurados por la propia UE. Toca ahora, en este periodo actual y tras haber visto el buen resultado que están dando, pasar a dotarles de otro estatuto jurídico al que ostentan, reconocerles como actores en la esfera de la cooperación policial internacionales dentro del ELSJ.
Palabras clave: CCPA, Iniciativa Sueca, principio de disponibilidad, Espacio Schengen, canal de intercambio de información, cooperación policial internacional, ELSJ, UE, DAPIX, EIXM, CAAS.
Resumen (otro idioma): Abstract With the EU Treaty, and more specifically, with the establishment of the Schengen Area, citizens (Maastricht, 1992) saw an increase in the possibility of travelling and settling freely in the internal territory we wished, without calling for border control requirements for crossing between countries. People of good faith would do this to find a better, or perhaps different life than the one they had been leading in their home countries. Or, in the case of foreigners settled in a Schengeland country, to be able to start over in another state party. But this lack of internal control between some states (all of them sovereign, let us not forget) has also meant a reduction in internal security, both within the EU and for the rest of the countries that, without being part of it, decided to establish this freedom of movement between their territories (Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Iceland or Norway). In order to combat and alleviate this lack of intra-border security and that organized crime, in all areas: terrorism, drug trafficking, trafficking in persons, trafficking in arms, vehicles, etc., could be detected and subsequently tried and punished, regardless of the internal country in which they were established or operated, police (and judicial) cooperation mechanisms were invented: (Eurojust-European Public Prosecutor's Office) that currently exist in the EU's AFSJ. The EU decentralized Security Agencies and Offices play their key role here in this criminal network. But not only are there this type of international police cooperation bodies, such as Europol, Frontex, European Anti-Fraud Office or Sirene, but since the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement another channel for the exchange of information that complements these Agencies and Offices has been born: the Police and Customs Cooperation Centers, or as they are known by their acronyms, PCCCs. Was there a need for more instruments to combat crime, in addition to those already in place and officially established by the EU institutions? The States decided that it should, since none of them was combating transnational crime operating in the common border areas in situ. To this end, through agreements signed ad referendum between the ministers of justice or home affairs of the countries with a common land border that so decided, and based on the authorization conferred on them by articles 39.4 and 5, and 46 of the CISA, these mechanisms of police cooperation (and where appropriate, customs) became a reality and the police forces were established (and again, customs) that the countries decide, in the same physical environment, as if it were a police station, but with members of all the police forces from the signatory countries. What were initially called Joint Police Stations, designed to deal with transnational crime of a local type, in the two decades following their first establishment, they had exceeded all initial expectations, with currently more than 60 Cooperative Police Centers that have proliferated throughout the internal borders of the EU, the Schengen Area and by the external borders that these states share with third countries, including from each other, copying this model to their land borders under the supervision of the EU, either through Europol or the countries that have encouraged these states to create them (such as the work done by Germany on the Balkan Peninsula). This creates another channel for the exchange of information, using the tools that the EU makes available to it: in addition to the CISA, the Swedish Initiative or the Prüm Convention. These and other International Agreements on police cooperation will allow the PCCCs to expand beyond the initial idea for what they were originally created (This is recognized by the Commission in its latest proposal to the Council and the European Parliament in 2021 to modify the Swedish Initiative) having become as effective a tool as those established by the EU itself. It is time now, in this current period and after having seen the good result they have carried out, to give them another legal status to which they hold, to recognize them as actors in the field of international police cooperation within the AFSJ. Key words: PCCC, Swedish Initiative, principle of availability, Schengen Area, Exchange Data Channel, International Police Cooperation, EU´s AFSJ, DAPIX, EIXM, CISA.
Palabras clave: CCPA, Iniciativa Sueca, principio de disponibilidad, Espacio Schengen, canal de intercambio de información, cooperación policial internacional, ELSJ, UE, DAPIX, EIXM, CAAS.
Resumen (otro idioma): Abstract With the EU Treaty, and more specifically, with the establishment of the Schengen Area, citizens (Maastricht, 1992) saw an increase in the possibility of travelling and settling freely in the internal territory we wished, without calling for border control requirements for crossing between countries. People of good faith would do this to find a better, or perhaps different life than the one they had been leading in their home countries. Or, in the case of foreigners settled in a Schengeland country, to be able to start over in another state party. But this lack of internal control between some states (all of them sovereign, let us not forget) has also meant a reduction in internal security, both within the EU and for the rest of the countries that, without being part of it, decided to establish this freedom of movement between their territories (Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Iceland or Norway). In order to combat and alleviate this lack of intra-border security and that organized crime, in all areas: terrorism, drug trafficking, trafficking in persons, trafficking in arms, vehicles, etc., could be detected and subsequently tried and punished, regardless of the internal country in which they were established or operated, police (and judicial) cooperation mechanisms were invented: (Eurojust-European Public Prosecutor's Office) that currently exist in the EU's AFSJ. The EU decentralized Security Agencies and Offices play their key role here in this criminal network. But not only are there this type of international police cooperation bodies, such as Europol, Frontex, European Anti-Fraud Office or Sirene, but since the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement another channel for the exchange of information that complements these Agencies and Offices has been born: the Police and Customs Cooperation Centers, or as they are known by their acronyms, PCCCs. Was there a need for more instruments to combat crime, in addition to those already in place and officially established by the EU institutions? The States decided that it should, since none of them was combating transnational crime operating in the common border areas in situ. To this end, through agreements signed ad referendum between the ministers of justice or home affairs of the countries with a common land border that so decided, and based on the authorization conferred on them by articles 39.4 and 5, and 46 of the CISA, these mechanisms of police cooperation (and where appropriate, customs) became a reality and the police forces were established (and again, customs) that the countries decide, in the same physical environment, as if it were a police station, but with members of all the police forces from the signatory countries. What were initially called Joint Police Stations, designed to deal with transnational crime of a local type, in the two decades following their first establishment, they had exceeded all initial expectations, with currently more than 60 Cooperative Police Centers that have proliferated throughout the internal borders of the EU, the Schengen Area and by the external borders that these states share with third countries, including from each other, copying this model to their land borders under the supervision of the EU, either through Europol or the countries that have encouraged these states to create them (such as the work done by Germany on the Balkan Peninsula). This creates another channel for the exchange of information, using the tools that the EU makes available to it: in addition to the CISA, the Swedish Initiative or the Prüm Convention. These and other International Agreements on police cooperation will allow the PCCCs to expand beyond the initial idea for what they were originally created (This is recognized by the Commission in its latest proposal to the Council and the European Parliament in 2021 to modify the Swedish Initiative) having become as effective a tool as those established by the EU itself. It is time now, in this current period and after having seen the good result they have carried out, to give them another legal status to which they hold, to recognize them as actors in the field of international police cooperation within the AFSJ. Key words: PCCC, Swedish Initiative, principle of availability, Schengen Area, Exchange Data Channel, International Police Cooperation, EU´s AFSJ, DAPIX, EIXM, CISA.
Pal. clave: derecho internacional publico ; organizaciones internacionales ; cooperacion internacional ; relaciones internacionales
Titulación: Programa de Doctorado en Derecho
Plan(es): Plan 500
Nota: Presentado: 27 10 2022
Nota: Tesis-Univ. Zaragoza, , 2022
Enlace permanente:
Registro creado el 2022-12-16, última modificación el 2022-12-16
