On 24 February 2022, the war in Ukraine began. Very quickly, questions surfaced about potential war crimes being committed in this conflict. The Attorney General of Ukraine and several Member States of the European Union opened investigations. Thirty-nine states, including all of the Member States of the European Union, decided to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

In this highly charged context, the Justice and Home Affairs Council of the European Union met on 4 March under the French Presidency. Immediately, in the face of unambiguous evidence, the idea materialised to request Eurojust to play a central role in coordinating the investigations. In turning automatically to Eurojust in this way, the Ministers for Justice and Home Affairs were paying it the highest tribute. As we celebrate Eurojust’s first 20 years this year, it is now firmly established as a key player in European and international judicial cooperation.

Eurojust has managed, in just 20 years of its existence, to win the trust of all stakeholders, to the point of becoming the figurehead of the European judicial area; and this is because it was set up in response to a crying need.

In 20 years, the European judicial area has progressed so much that we have forgotten the extent to which the traditional forms of judicial cooperation, still prevailing in the 1990s, were obsolete. While the geopolitical upheavals in Eastern Europe and the entry into force of the Schengen Agreement in 1995 had opened up the European area by allowing people to move more freely across borders, justice remained constrained within its national borders. The judicial cooperation, unchanged for decades, was not between judicial authorities, but between states, and this gave rise to proceedings that were often long and ineffective. This was criticised by some, and the Geneva Appeal launched in 1996 by seven European judges to denounce the hampering of their investigations – in particular in the areas of organised crime and combatting corruption – set alarm bells ringing.

The Treaty of Amsterdam’s entry into force in 1999 gave the European Union the new objective of creating a European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and was a response to the Geneva Appeal, as it opened the door to completely new mechanisms for cooperation. One of the jewels of this cooperation is Eurojust.

After creating a network of liaison magistrates and the European Judicial Network, which were the first tools developed to strengthen direct contact between practitioners to facilitate judicial cooperation, one further step was needed. At the Tampere European Council meeting, the rationale for creating Eurojust was set out. Let me pay tribute to the visionary actions taken by some of my predecessors, and in particular Elisabeth Guigou, Minister of Justice at the time of the French Presidency in 2000, who succeeded in having the regulation adopted to create the provisional Eurojust unit. That unit began its work in March 2001 in Brussels.

The regulation that definitively created Eurojust was eventually negotiated at the same time as the European Arrest Warrant, after the shocking attacks of 9/11. At the turn of the century, with the terrorist threat looming large, the European judiciary had to equip itself with the tools that it needed to protect Europeans and to combat crime. On 28 February 2002, Eurojust was born.

However, in the specific context of the early 2000s, Eurojust still had to assert itself, earn its place among the European institutions and create the conditions for trust among the judicial authorities of the Member States.

In the light of these first 20 years of Eurojust, I think it can be said that its success stems from the ongoing concern of its members to respond to the operational needs of European justice and their capacity to adapt.

The very essence of Eurojust and the ongoing concern of its members is operational and aims to help judges carry out their investigations so that differences between legal systems no longer pose obstacles. And Eurojust has proven itself in case after case.

Operational successes made possible by Eurojust have nurtured among practitioners the trust that is vital for judicial cooperation within the Union. Today, everywhere in Europe, practitioners have acquired the ‘Eurojust reflex’. Its expertise and effectiveness of its methods are universally acknowledged by professionals on the ground with responsibility for undertaking cross-border investigations on a daily basis. The figures speak for themselves: 10 000 cases handled in 2021, 254 joint investigation teams (JITs), 3 329 suspects arrested or brought before the courts, 1 928 rapid responses to judicial cooperation requests, the coordination of 1 419 large-scale operations, criminal assets worth EUR 2.8 billion seized or frozen, and drug seizures worth EUR 7 billion. Eurojust is now a major player in judicial cooperation and in the fight against crime in Europe. The methods that Eurojust uses, in particular the digital tools, have allowed it to continue to work during the pandemic without affecting its results.

If I just take the case of France, I see that, in 2021, France opened 258 cases at Eurojust, it was a requested Member State in 766 cases, and it signed up to 13 joint investigation teams (JITs). This is all the more significant given that these are major investigations. I would like to commend the French desk in particular for its successful results.

In the area of terrorism, in which France is a particular target, the role of Eurojust has been decisive in bringing about effective investigations. In the aftermath of the Bataclan attacks, a JIT was created at Eurojust and coordination meetings were organised. In instances where states acting alone or in a fragmentary way would be ineffectual, Eurojust now provides a common framework that enables proceedings to go ahead.

In the same vein, some momentous victories against transnational organised crime can be directly attributed to the coordinating role played by Eurojust. For example, in the ‘EncroChat’ case, highly complex organised crime networks were uncovered following the lawful interception of encrypted communications. In this case, the coordination within Eurojust led to the dismantling of criminal networks in more than 13 countries, hundreds of arrests and the confiscation of criminal assets worth several million euros.

Of course, Eurojust’s successes stem from its favourable position, arising from its close judicial cooperation in criminal matters and the use of new instruments. It would be remiss of me not to refer to significant advances such as the European Arrest Warrant – also turning 20 in 2022 –, the European Investigation Order and the Freezing and Confiscation Directive; and more generally, all the texts adopted in the last 20 years that give substance to the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions, align criminal legislation more closely, enable mutual trust and equip the European Union with tools for enhancing the quality of judicial exchanges.

The partnership with Europol is also a key factor in increasing the effectiveness of the fight against crime in Europe. As early as 2005, the two agencies signed a first Cooperation Agreement. Since then, they have developed extensive experience in joint interventions, on the same cases, to support national authorities, in particular in the context of coordination centres.

Regardless of the area of crime, Eurojust, therefore, is a leading partner for judicial practitioners.

Allow me, on behalf of the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union, to commend the work and commitment of the women and men who have made it happen at Eurojust on a daily basis over the past 20 years.

With those in mind, I wanted the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union to celebrate Eurojust’s anniversary in a fitting way, by holding a conference on 18 February 2022. Due to the public health constraints, we met by video conference. Nonetheless, I wanted to use the opportunity of this anniversary to take stock of the past 20 years in order to contemplate future prospects, three of which seem to me to be of crucial importance.

First, the ongoing modernisation of Eurojust’s legal and technological tools.

Over the years, Eurojust has evolved. In July 2008, a decision of the Council increased its operational capacities, facilitating procedures for cooperation with the judicial authorities of Member States, and strengthening its relationships with third countries. The adoption of the regulation of November 2018 then granted it the status of a European Union agency. It also enabled Eurojust to adopt a new system of governance and a new data protection regime, thereby firmly establishing it on the landscape of European institutions.

The French Presidency of the Council of the European Union is fully committed to working towards implementing the proposal to provide Eurojust with the legal framework to exchange digital information in cases of terrorism. This modernisation of the case management system will increase the effectiveness and proactive nature of Eurojust. Going beyond that text, it will be important for Eurojust to be able to benefit at all times from the latest technological advances to pursue its work in all areas of combatting crime, including cybercrime, the threat of which is constantly increasing.

Moreover, the extensive involvement of Eurojust in the ongoing investigations into possible war crimes in Ukraine will further strengthen its legal framework, so that it can fully guarantee that all forms of collected evidence are preserved properly and can be examined and sent to the jurisdictions concerned, in particular the ICC. The French Presidency hopes that these enhancements will be adopted swiftly.

Second, Eurojust must strengthen its relationships with third countries. Organised crime and terrorism are global phenomena that largely ignore borders. To increase its effectiveness, Eurojust has extended its activity outside the European Union, and signed numerous cooperation agreements with third countries. In 2021, the Council authorised Eurojust to negotiate agreements with 13 new partners. These agreements will further increase Eurojust’s capacity and allow it to use its most advanced cooperation tools outside the European Union. These tools include coordination meetings, coordination centres and assistance to JITs. Some third countries have seconded Liaison Prosecutors to Eurojust, who constitute valuable links.

Eurojust’s potential in the international sphere is recognised to such a degree that, a few days after the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, the Attorney General of Ukraine asked Eurojust to create a JIT to look into potential war crimes committed on Ukrainian territory.

The wish of the Prosecutor of the ICC to strengthen its partnership with the Agency, in particular with regard to the conflict in Ukraine, shows that the methods employed by Eurojust are becoming international benchmarks. Eurojust’s international activity is one of the keys to its future and to its influence.

Finally, and more generally, the main challenge for Eurojust will continue to involve adapting its work to the evolving needs of judicial cooperation.

Recently, to intensify the fight against the smuggling of migrants, Eurojust, in tandem with Europol, launched a focus group. The group brings together stakeholders concerned about security and criminal justice systems and has led to the opening of 170 new cases, the creation of 11 JITs and the convening of 22 coordination meetings.

In addition, Eurojust on several occasions has played a vital role in coordinating assistance to victims of catastrophes, whether they be terrorist acts such as the attacks in Nice and Barcelona, or transport incidents such as the Germanwings aeroplane crash. This represents a new field of expertise in which the Agency can develop its activities in the future.

It would be remiss of me to conclude without mentioning the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). As the direct successor of Eurojust in its area of competences under the Treaty, the EPPO benefits from the accumulated experience of Eurojust in the area of criminal justice cooperation. The EPPO has the power to undertake direct investigations all over Europe whenever the financial interests of the Union are at stake. It embodies the evolution of European judicial cooperation towards deeper integration, and reflection on this must continue. There is already operational cooperation between the two institutions, and this will inevitably develop in the coming years.

The European Union is never as strong and as useful as when it can reconcile ambition and effectiveness. Eurojust is a remarkable example of that: the Agency carries the ambition of shared values. These values – justice, freedoms, combatting impunity, respect for the rule of law and protecting victims – influenced its very foundation. Over the years, Eurojust has proven its worth, gained in experience and professionalism, and demonstrated its expertise and its added value. Eurojust represents a Europe that protects, sometimes far away from the cameras and out of the spotlight. It represents a Europe that acts, works and builds, a Europe that links operational effectiveness and respect for fundamental freedoms, a Europe that is pragmatic and devoted to its values.

On behalf of the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union: happy anniversary, Eurojust! And thank you to those who make it happen on a daily basis.