The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, James Brokenshire, said “… the Commission’s EPPO proposal is fundamentally flawed on many levels, not least in failing to pass the subsidiarity test.” He noted, “… there has now been a sufficient number of votes in member states’ national Parliaments—including the House of Commons last week and the other place last night—to result in the issue of what is termed a yellow card, which means that the Commission is now required to review its proposal.” However, it has been reported today that the European Commission is planning to proceed by enhanced cooperation.
According to the EUobserver Mina Andreeva, European commission justice spokesperson said, “A clear majority of member states have not issued reasoned opinions and can thus be counted among the probable participants to the European public prosecutor's office”.
James Brokenshire also pointed out, “The reforms proposed to Eurojust would involve deep connections with the EPPO, because the legal base for the EPPO requires it to be created “from Eurojust”.” He particularly noted that Eurojust would treat “any request for support from the EPPO as if it had been received from a national competent authority.” Hence, it would be “irresponsible in the extreme for us to risk binding ourselves to the European public prosecutor through our participation in the new Eurojust proposal. That would be a needless risk, given that we can review our place in Eurojust on its adoption.” James Brokenshire also stressed that both measures challenge “some of the fundamental principles and aspects of our criminal justice system.”
