(1)

The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice.

(2)

Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions.

(3)

According to the Stockholm Programme — An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens (2), mutual recognition should extend to all types of judgments and decisions of a judicial nature, which may, depending on the legal system, be either criminal or administrative. It also calls on the Commission and the Member States to examine how to improve legislation and practical support measures for the protection of victims. The programme also points out that victims of crime can be offered special protection measures which should be effective within the Union. This Directive forms part of a coherent and comprehensive set of measures on victims’ rights.

(4)

The resolution of the European Parliament of 26 November 2009 on the elimination of violence against women calls on Member States to improve their national laws and policies to combat all forms of violence against women and to act in order to tackle the causes of violence against women, not least by employing preventive measures and calls on the Union to guarantee the right to assistance and support for all victims of violence. The resolution of the European Parliament of 10 February 2010 on equality between women and men in the European Union 2009 endorses the proposal to introduce the European protection order for victims.

(5)

In its Resolution of 10 June 2011 on a Roadmap for strengthening the rights and protection of victims, in particular in criminal proceedings, the Council stated that action should be taken at the level of the Union in order to strengthen the rights and protection of victims of crime and called on the Commission to present appropriate proposals to that end. In this framework, a mechanism should be created to ensure mutual recognition among Member States of decisions concerning protection measures for victims of crime. According to that Resolution, this Directive, which concerns the mutual recognition of protection measures taken in criminal matters, should be complemented by an appropriate mechanism concerning measures taken in civil matters.

(6)

In a common area of justice without internal borders, it is necessary to ensure that the protection provided to a natural person in one Member State is maintained and continued in any other Member State to which the person moves or has moved. It should also be ensured that the legitimate exercise by citizens of the Union of their right to move and reside freely within the territory of Member States, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 21 TFEU, does not result in a loss of their protection.

(7)

In order to attain these objectives, this Directive should set out rules whereby the protection stemming from certain protection measures adopted according to the law of one Member State (‘the issuing State’) can be extended to another Member State in which the protected person decides to reside or stay (‘the executing State’).

(8)

This Directive takes account of the different legal traditions of the Member States as well as the fact that effective protection can be provided by means of protection orders issued by an authority other than a criminal court. This Directive does not create obligations to modify national systems for adopting protection measures nor does it create obligations to introduce or amend a criminal law system for executing a European protection order.

(9)

This Directive applies to protection measures which aim specifically to protect a person against a criminal act of another person which may, in any way, endanger that person’s life or physical, psychological and sexual integrity, for example by preventing any form of harassment, as well as that person’s dignity or personal liberty, for example by preventing abductions, stalking and other forms of indirect coercion, and which aim to prevent new criminal acts or to reduce the consequences of previous criminal acts. These personal rights of the protected person correspond to fundamental values recognised and upheld in all Member States. However, a Member State is not obliged to issue a European protection order on the basis of a criminal measure which does not serve specifically to protect a person, but primarily serves other aims, for example the social rehabilitation of the offender. It is important to underline that this Directive applies to protection measures which aim to protect all victims and not only the victims of gender violence, taking into account the specificities of each type of crime concerned.

(10)

This Directive applies to protection measures adopted in criminal matters, and does not therefore cover protection measures adopted in civil matters. For a protection measure to be executable in accordance with this Directive, it is not necessary for a criminal offence to have been established by a final decision. Nor is the criminal, administrative or civil nature of the authority adopting a protection measure relevant. This Directive does not oblige Member States to amend their national law to enable them to adopt protection measures in the context of criminal proceedings.

(11)

This Directive is intended to apply to protection measures adopted in favour of victims, or possible victims, of crimes. This Directive should not therefore apply to measures adopted with a view to witness protection.

(12)

If a protection measure, as defined in this Directive, is adopted for the protection of a relative of the main protected person, a European protection order may also be requested by and issued in respect of that relative, subject to the conditions laid down in this Directive.

(13)

Any request for the issuing of a European protection order should be treated with appropriate speed, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case, including the urgency of the matter, the date foreseen for the arrival of the protected person on the territory of the executing State and, where possible, the degree of risk for the protected person.

(14)

Where information is to be provided under this Directive to the protected person or to the person causing danger, this information should also, where relevant, be provided to the guardian or the representative of the person concerned. Due attention should also be paid to the need for the protected person, the person causing danger or the guardian or representative in the proceedings, to receive the information provided for by this Directive, in a language that that person understands.

(15)

In the procedures for the issuing and recognition of a European protection order, competent authorities should give appropriate consideration to the needs of victims, including particularly vulnerable persons, such as minors or persons with disabilities.

(16)

For the application of this Directive, a protection measure may have been imposed following a judgment within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments and probation decisions with a view to the supervision of probation measures and alternative sanctions (3), or following a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA of 23 October 2009 on the application, between Member States of the European Union, of the principle of mutual recognition to decisions on supervision measures as an alternative to provisional detention (4). If a decision was adopted in the issuing State on the basis of one of those Framework Decisions, the recognition procedure should be followed accordingly in the executing State. This, however, should not exclude the possibility to transfer a European protection order to a Member State other than the State executing decisions based on those Framework Decisions.

(17)

In accordance with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the person causing danger should be provided, either during the procedure leading to the adoption of a protection measure or before issuing a European protection order, with the possibility of being heard and challenging the protection measure.

(18)

In order to prevent a crime being committed against the victim in the executing State, that State should have the legal means for recognising the decision previously adopted in the issuing State in favour of the victim, while also avoiding the need for the victim to start new proceedings or to produce evidence in the executing State again, as if the issuing State had not adopted the decision. The recognition of the European protection order by the executing State implies, inter alia, that the competent authority of that State, subject to the limitations set out in this Directive, accepts the existence and validity of the protection measure adopted in the issuing State, acknowledges the factual situation described in the European protection order, and agrees that protection should be provided and should continue to be provided in accordance with its national law.

(19)

This Directive contains an exhaustive list of prohibitions and restrictions which, when imposed in the issuing State and included in the European protection order, should be recognised and enforced in the executing State, subject to the limitations set out in this Directive. Other types of protection measures may exist at national level, such as, if provided by national law, the obligation on the person causing danger to remain in a specified place. Such measures may be imposed in the issuing State in the framework of the procedure leading to the adoption of one of the protection measures which, according to this Directive, may be the basis for a European protection order.

(20)

Since, in the Member States, different kinds of authorities (civil, criminal or administrative) are competent to adopt and enforce protection measures, it is appropriate to provide a high degree of flexibility in the cooperation mechanism between the Member States under this Directive. Therefore, the competent authority in the executing State is not required in all cases to take the same protection measure as those which were adopted in the issuing State, and has a degree of discretion to adopt any measure which it deems adequate and appropriate under its national law in a similar case in order to provide continued protection to the protected person in the light of the protection measure adopted in the issuing State as described in the European protection order.

(21)

The prohibitions or restrictions to which this Directive applies include, among others, measures aimed at limiting personal or remote contacts between the protected person and the person causing danger, for example by imposing certain conditions on such contacts or imposing restrictions on the contents of communications.

(22)

The competent authority of the executing State should inform the person causing danger, the competent authority of the issuing State and the protected person of any measure adopted on the basis of the European protection order. In the notification to the person causing danger, due regard should be taken of the interest of the protected person in not having that person’s address or other contact details disclosed. Such details should be excluded from the notification, provided that the address or other contact details are not included in the prohibition or restriction imposed as an enforcement measure on the person causing danger.

(23)

When the competent authority in the issuing State withdraws the European protection order, the competent authority in the executing State should discontinue the measures which it has adopted in order to enforce the European protection order, it being understood that the competent authority in the executing State may — autonomously, and in accordance with its national law — adopt any protection measure under its national law in order to protect the person concerned.

(24)

Given that this Directive deals with situations in which the protected person moves to another Member State, issuing or executing a European protection order should not imply any transfer to the executing State of powers relating to principal, suspended, alternative, conditional or secondary penalties, or relating to security measures imposed on the person causing danger, if the latter continues to reside in the State that adopted the protection measure.

(25)

Where appropriate, it should be possible to use electronic means with a view to putting into practice the measures adopted in application of this Directive, in accordance with national laws and procedures.

(26)

In the context of cooperation among the authorities involved in ensuring the protection of the protected person, the competent authority of the executing State should communicate to the competent authority of the issuing State any breach of the measures adopted in the executing State with a view to executing the European protection order. This communication should enable the competent authority of the issuing State to promptly decide on any appropriate response with respect to the protection measure imposed in its State on the person causing danger. Such a response may comprise, where appropriate, the imposition of a custodial measure in substitution of the non-custodial measure that was originally adopted, for example, as an alternative to preventive detention or as a consequence of the conditional suspension of a penalty. It is understood that such a decision, since it does not impose ex novo a penalty in relation to a new criminal offence, does not interfere with the possibility that the executing State may, where applicable, impose penalties in the event of a breach of the measures adopted in order to execute the European protection order.

(27)

In view of the different legal traditions of the Member States, where no protection measure would be available in the executing State in a case similar to the factual situation described in the European protection order, the competent authority of the executing State should report any breach of the protection measure described in the European protection order of which it is aware to the competent authority of the issuing State.

(28)

In order to ensure the smooth application of this Directive in each particular case, the competent authorities of the issuing and the executing States should exercise their competencies in accordance with the provisions of this Directive, taking into account the principle of ne bis in idem.

(29)

The protected person should not be required to sustain costs related to the recognition of the European protection order which are disproportionate to a similar national case. When implementing this Directive, Member States should ensure that, after recognition of the European protection order, the protected person is not required to initiate further national proceedings to obtain from the competent authority of the executing State, as a direct consequence of the recognition of the European protection order, a decision adopting any measure that would be available under its national law in a similar case in order to ensure the protection of the protected person.

(30)

Bearing in mind the principle of mutual recognition upon which this Directive is based, Member States should promote, to the widest extent possible, direct contact between the competent authorities when they apply this Directive.

(31)

Without prejudice to judicial independence and differences in the organisation of the judiciary across the Union, Member States should consider requesting those responsible for the training of judges, prosecutors, police and judicial staff involved in the procedures aimed at issuing or recognising a European protection order to provide appropriate training with respect to the objectives of this Directive.

(32)

In order to facilitate the evaluation of the application of this Directive, Member States should communicate to the Commission relevant data related to the application of national procedures on the European protection order, at least with regard to the number of European protection orders requested, issued and/or recognised. In this respect, other types of data, such as, for example, the types of crimes concerned, would also be useful.

(33)

This Directive should contribute to the protection of persons who are in danger, thereby complementing, but not affecting, the instruments already in place in this field, such as Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA and Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA.

(34)

When a decision relating to a protection measure falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (5), Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility (6), or the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children (7), the recognition and enforcement of that decision should be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the relevant legal instrument.

(35)

Member States and the Commission should include information about the European protection order, where it is appropriate, in existing education and awareness-raising campaigns on the protection of victims of crime.

(36)

Personal data processed when implementing this Directive should be protected in accordance with Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (8) and with the principles laid down in the 1981 Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data.

(37)

This Directive should respect the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in accordance with Article 6 TEU.

(38)

When implementing this Directive, Member States are encouraged to take into account the rights and principles enshrined in the 1979 United Nations Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.

(39)

Since the objective of this Directive, namely to protect persons who are in danger, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 TEU. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(40)

In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the United Kingdom has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Directive.

(41)

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol (No 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

(42)

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application,

(1)

‘European protection order’ means a decision, taken by a judicial or equivalent authority of a Member State in relation to a protection measure, on the basis of which a judicial or equivalent authority of another Member State takes any appropriate measure or measures under its own national law with a view to continuing the protection of the protected person;

(2)

‘protection measure’ means a decision in criminal matters adopted in the issuing State in accordance with its national law and procedures by which one or more of the prohibitions or restrictions referred to in Article 5 are imposed on a person causing danger in order to protect a protected person against a criminal act which may endanger his life, physical or psychological integrity, dignity, personal liberty or sexual integrity;

(3)

‘protected person’ means a natural person who is the object of the protection resulting from a protection measure adopted by the issuing State;

(4)

‘person causing danger’ means the natural person on whom one or more of the prohibitions or restrictions referred to in Article 5 have been imposed;

(5)

‘issuing State’ means the Member State in which a protection measure has been adopted that constitutes the basis for issuing a European protection order;

(6)

‘executing State’ means the Member State to which a European protection order has been forwarded with a view to its recognition;

(7)

‘State of supervision’ means the Member State to which a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA, has been transferred.

(a)

a prohibition from entering certain localities, places or defined areas where the protected person resides or visits;

(b)

a prohibition or regulation of contact, in any form, with the protected person, including by phone, electronic or ordinary mail, fax or any other means; or

(c)

a prohibition or regulation on approaching the protected person closer than a prescribed distance.

(a)

the identity and nationality of the protected person, as well as the identity and nationality of the guardian or representative if the protected person is a minor or is legally incapacitated;

(b)

the date from which the protected person intends to reside or stay in the executing State, and the period or periods of stay, if known;

(c)

the name, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address of the competent authority of the issuing State;

(d)

identification (for example, through a number and date) of the legal act containing the protection measure on the basis of which the European protection order is issued;

(e)

a summary of the facts and circumstances which have led to the adoption of the protection measure in the issuing State;

(f)

the prohibitions or restrictions imposed, in the protection measure underlying the European protection order, on the person causing danger, their duration and the indication of the penalty, if any, in the event of the breach of any of the prohibitions or restrictions;

(g)

the use of a technical device, if any, that has been provided to the protected person or to the person causing danger as a means of enforcing the protection measure;

(h)

the identity and nationality of the person causing danger, as well as that person’s contact details;

(i)

where such information is known by the competent authority of the issuing State without requiring further inquiry, whether the protected person and/or the person causing danger has been granted free legal aid in the issuing State;

(j)

a description, where appropriate, of other circumstances that could have an influence on the assessment of the danger that confronts the protected person;

(k)

an express indication, where applicable, that a judgment within the meaning of Article 2 of Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, or a decision on supervision measures within the meaning of Article 4 of Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA, has already been transferred to the State of supervision, when this is different from the State of execution of the European protection order, and the identification of the competent authority of that State for the enforcement of such a judgment or decision.