2. Taking into account the developments in the next five years, which are the actions to be launched at the EU level?

Transcription

1 1. Which specific challenges need to be tackled by EU action in the coming five years regarding international crime, radicalisation and terrorism, cybercrime and cyber-attacks, natural and man-made disasters? What role should the border security have in addressing those challenges? Taking into consideration the civil war in Syria, its spread beyond the territory of one country and the large share of combatants of European descent in the conflict area, we see the need for special attention to be paid to the alleviation of the foreign fighters issue. This is a multi-faceted problem, so the solution should cover the motives for the relocation into the conflict area, the capability for detecting people s departure as well as preventing it and mitigate the hazards caused by returning fighters. Intra-community prevention activities ("winning hearts and minds") which require multilateral cooperation on the national and international level are of key importance. The availability of passenger name record, i.e. PNR data as well as the introduction of legal regulation over the member states is gaining importance. Against the background of what is happening in Ukraine, it is important to pay even more attention to non-religious terrorism. During the term of validity of the revised strategy, the mitigation of the consequences of events in Ukraine will also become significant. It is likely that the situation in Ukraine will be abused by criminal organisations in order to obtain weapons and explosives with a view to mediating them to persons located in the EU so that they could perform attacks. Thus, supporting the stabilisation of internal security in nearby states to provide assistance to them for the implementation of reforms needs to be one of the parts of the strategy. It is likely that input is required for the implementation of the security sector reform in Ukraine during the term of validity of the next strategy. In the nearest years, the sphere of cybercrime is likely to see more and more informationrelated attacks misinformation and fake news aimed to spread havoc among the public and instill mistrust towards the government. From the technical point of view, an increase in the number of attacks on various smart devices that are too vulnerable compared to other information systems is likely to be expected. Attacks in the so-called grey areas that are not yet under legal regulation (for instance, the use of drones or attacks on privacy) also deserve attention. The cyber space transcends national boundaries, so cooperation among the states to apprehend the perpetrators having engaged in cyberbullying and other crimes is especially important, including the cooperation in criminal prosecution or, for example, in preventing access to web sites depicting sexual exploitation of children (the creation of warning systems and similar systems depends on the national legislation). This is why, inter alia, we consider the promotion of cooperation within the Global Alliance against Child Sexual Abuse Online important.

2 We still consider the increasing of cybercrime awareness and the organisation of training events to be of utmost importance. The objective of prevention activities is to prevent the risk of victimisation and shape attitudes and standards in all spheres, including the use of ID cards and communication in social networks. We also find that corruption should be addressed as a wider threat to our security rather than merely another form of crime. 2. Taking into account the developments in the next five years, which are the actions to be launched at the EU level? Estonia absolutely agrees with the conclusions provided in the final ISS implementation report of the Commission, namely, that the five strategic objectives are still of current interest and should be restated in the revised internal security strategy. We agree that the implementation of existing legal acts, consolidating of what has been achieved and the development of more efficient practical cooperation between the member states are necessary. We consider closer cooperation and broader opportunities for information exchange particularly significant, especially considering the infiltration of organized crime into the legal economy. In addition, we believe it is important to continue the unification of the standards of pan-european substantive and procedural laws and to establish minimum standards. New ICT opportunities should be used more efficiently at the current and especially the next stage of policy-making. We emphasise once again that the PNR directive needs to be passed, the Smart Borders Package needs to be put into operation, and adequate financing for the deployment of new technologies needs to be ensured. We also support the expansion of eu-lisa s competences. More extensive support and development of regional cooperation must be one of the clear objectives of the strategy. We agree that the cooperation between member states in fighting major and organized crime needs further development. At the same time, regional cooperation, the setting of the relevant cooperation priorities and the organisation of joint operations, including the use of joint investigation teams (JITs), need to be fostered. More attention should also be paid to regional special needs in the implementation of the EU policy cycle. We would also like to mention the ATLAS and Prüm cooperation formats as specific measures that could be more efficient and better implemented. The capability of responding to cross-border crises needs to be increased as far as ATLAS is concerned. It is important to ensure that there are opportunities for joint exercises in addition to training to level out equipment opportunities and to ensure CBRN-e response capability. In order to achieve the objectives of the Prüm Convention, cross-border cooperation needs to

3 be practiced, including joint patrols and the organisation of joint operations as well as increasing the efficiency of inter-agency data exchange through the development of joint systems (instead of individual systems). Terrorism is a sphere that requires constant and consistent attention. This is why we propose restarting peer reviews within the format of the Council Terrorism Working Party. We suggest that such issues as the CBRN capability and organisation of the countries and the terrorist threat emergency response plans of the member states as well as the member states activities for the implementation of Schengen compensatory measures be addressed by the working group. We also find that the role of the EU Counter-terrorism Coordinator needs to be enhanced in order to improve inter-agency information exchange, among other things. We also consider it necessary to hold a regional exercise on the basis of article 222 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the Solidarity clause) and to practice cooperation among the member states in the EU format as well. In the context of the implementation of the internal security strategy, the opportunity for planning EU financing over a longer term is of paramount importance. Strategic objectives that do not have clear financial support cannot be attained. The setting of new objectives for the following period needs to be based on thorough evaluations which will also allow time-framed action plans and budgets as well as participation and leader member states to be determined. Increased coherence and multidisciplinarity would benefit from, for example, closer cooperation and joint meetings of Brussels-based working groups. The joint format of the Standing Committee on operational cooperation on internal security (COSI) and the Political and Security Committee (PSC) are good examples. The role of COSI should be enhanced and its response efficiency should be increased. The internal security strategy should take cybersecurity into consideration as a major threat domain and plan its activities accordingly. The EU internal security strategy and the cybersecurity strategy should be consistent with and complement each other. Foreign partners and vice versa should be more actively involved in cybersecurity and cyber crisis exercises. International cooperation is also significant for the training of cybersecurity specialists and such cooperation between law enforcement facilities as well as higher education facilities should be supported. We consider the development of cyber criminalistics to be of key importance. Taking into consideration the increasing use of cyber methods for committing crimes (money laundering, child pornography etc.), the use of new technologies in addition to standard criminal

4 investigation techniques to identify perpetrators has become more important than ever. We attribute great significance to expanding the strategy where it pertains to the consolidation of best cyber criminalistics practices and the improvement of cyber criminalistics training. We find that the European Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN) should be developed into an effective forum for exchanging best practices. This presumably requires no changes in the legal basis of the network but rather needs consistent financing (at the moment it is project-based, but transferring it under the Commission might rebound). The integration of the EUCPN activities with the activities in the sphere of EU Justice and Home Affairs etc. should also continue so that the EU prevention policy would be rationally based on the EU serious and organized crime policy cycle as well as other coordinated sphere-specific priorities instead of being a stand-alone policy. Prevention as an activity cannot be viewed separately from other activities: officials also contribute to crime prevention or, in a broader sense, to the formation of social standards in the course while doing their main job (monitoring, proceedings etc.). 3. Which specific research, technology and innovation initiatives are needed to strengthen the EU s capabilities to address security challenges? We consider the improvement of cooperation with the private sector important. Cooperation with the Internet service providers for the prevention of radicalisation is a good example. The role of teaching and scholarly work for the improvement of internal security policy cannot be underestimated either: the opportunities of the Law Enforcement Training Scheme (LETS) need further analysis and science-based approach as well as the means provided by Horizon 2020 need to be used more extensively. Among other things, the prevention of threats related to large-scale accidents and terrorism as well as visual simulation training environments should be promoted. The efficiency factor of visual simulation training for the sphere of internal security as a whole (as well as for the society) lies in the opportunity to receive interactive training services to increase operational efficiency and tactical preparedness in order to cope with the liquidation of consequences of large-scale accidents and terrorist attacks. In the long-term perspective, this will be associated with the reduction of expenses and cooperation between internal security institutions by means of joint exercises. The above will instill common techniques and tactical strategies which are in the end to improve the quality of internal security services. Cooperation between the EU internal security agencies as well as between different cooperation formats and the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN) needs to be developed; research needs to be conducted to determine the reasons, sources and probability of radicalisation whereas best practices and analytical counter-measures need to be used;

5 specialists in de-radicalisation measures need to be trained, and adaptation programmes for new immigrants need to be enhanced. At the same time, for the prevention of radicalisation technological innovations for the prevention and stopping of on-line radicalisation and mitigating threats coming from the so-called grey internet need to be developed and implemented. 4. What is needed to safeguard the rights of the European citizens when developing future EU security actions? We believe that the activities enhancing security in the EU are based on the principles of respect for human rights, the rule of law and proportionality and that the fundamental rights of European citizens are guaranteed as long as the above principles are followed. Large-scale cooperation of law enforcement institutions with legislators, representatives of civil society and the private sector is needed to protect citizens rights in the course of the development of new security measures. EU consultation processes and mechanisms must continue to ensure that respect for human dignity; freedom, democracy and equality are guaranteed in the course of the development of new measures. 5. How can the EU s foreign policy improve the security within the EU and/or your country? In the new policy period, we consider cooperation with third countries for curbing illegal immigration and preventing terrorism through political dialogue and the provision of technical assistance especially important. We find that the COSI and PSC formats of joint sessions could be used more efficiently for this purpose.