This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check/2016/mar/29/eu-dangerous-criminals-allowed-free-entry-uk-vote-leave-claims

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Does the EU really allow dangerous criminals free entry to the UK? Does the EU really allow dangerous criminals free entry to the UK?
(about 5 hours later)
Question: The Vote Leave campaign has published a dossier of 50 dangerous citizens from other European Union states, including murderers and rapists, who have been allowed into Britain. It says this is evidence that the UK is “unable to prevent dangerous individuals from walking into the country” while it remains in the EU. Is there any truth in this? Question: The Vote Leave campaign has published a dossier of 50 dangerous citizens from EU states, including murderers and rapists, who have been allowed into Britain. It says this is evidence that the UK is “unable to prevent dangerous individuals from walking into the country” while it remains in the trade bloc. Is there any truth in this?
Answer: It is simply not the case that, as Nigel Farage has claimed, “we can’t stop people like this entering the country”. The EU’s 2004 citizenship directive makes it clear that the free movement of people within the EU is not an unqualified right and can be restricted on grounds of “public policy, public security or public health”. This means that serious offenders can be denied entry and the right to live in Britain.Answer: It is simply not the case that, as Nigel Farage has claimed, “we can’t stop people like this entering the country”. The EU’s 2004 citizenship directive makes it clear that the free movement of people within the EU is not an unqualified right and can be restricted on grounds of “public policy, public security or public health”. This means that serious offenders can be denied entry and the right to live in Britain.
However, the directive does say “previous criminal convictions shall not in themselves constitute grounds for taking such measures”, but adds that convicted criminals can be excluded on a case-by-case basis if they present “a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”.However, the directive does say “previous criminal convictions shall not in themselves constitute grounds for taking such measures”, but adds that convicted criminals can be excluded on a case-by-case basis if they present “a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”.
Q: So if convicted criminals are not automatically excluded, aren’t the leave campaigners right to say that murderers and rapists will be allowed in?Q: So if convicted criminals are not automatically excluded, aren’t the leave campaigners right to say that murderers and rapists will be allowed in?
A: No. As Steve Peers, a professor of EU law at Essex University, has pointed out, they could be refused entry and it is hard to imagine any British judge or the European court of justice overturning that decision in cases involving such serious crimes. As the former Conservative immigration and policing minister Damian Green has said, nearly 6,000 European Economic Area nationals have been prevented from entering Britain since 2010.A: No. As Steve Peers, a professor of EU law at Essex University, has pointed out, they could be refused entry and it is hard to imagine any British judge or the European court of justice overturning that decision in cases involving such serious crimes. As the former Conservative immigration and policing minister Damian Green has said, nearly 6,000 European Economic Area nationals have been prevented from entering Britain since 2010.
Q: But what about the 50 cases of murderers and rapists cited by Vote Leave? Why weren’t they refused entry?Q: But what about the 50 cases of murderers and rapists cited by Vote Leave? Why weren’t they refused entry?
A: The most likely reason is that the UK border force was not aware of their criminal convictions when they entered Britain. The worst case cited in the dossier is that of Arnis Zalkalns, a Latvian builder who, having been jailed in his home country for murdering his wife, moved to Britain in 2007 before allegedly murdering 14-year-old Alice Gross in west London. A: The most likely reason is that the UK Border Force was not aware of their criminal convictions when they entered Britain. The worst case cited in the dossier is that of Arnis Zalkalns, a Latvian builder who, having been jailed in his home country for murdering his wife, moved to Britain in 2007 before allegedly murdering 14-year-old Alice Gross in west London.
He came to London before EU laws on sharing information relating to criminal records came into effect in 2012. The limited measure focuses mainly on telling EU member states when one of their citizens has committed an offence abroad, but it may have flagged up Zalkalns before he arrived.He came to London before EU laws on sharing information relating to criminal records came into effect in 2012. The limited measure focuses mainly on telling EU member states when one of their citizens has committed an offence abroad, but it may have flagged up Zalkalns before he arrived.
The problem is that the sharing of information regarding criminal convictions across Europe is still at a rudimentary stage. If someone is high profile, has committed serious crimes in several countries, or is on Europol’s wanted list, they are likely to be on the UK border force warning list database. The problem is that the sharing of information regarding criminal convictions across Europe is still at a rudimentary stage. If someone is high profile, has committed serious crimes in several countries, or is on Europol’s wanted list, they are likely to be on the UK Border Force warning list database.
Countries such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Portugal flag up potentially dangerous people so that they can be turned away at the border, but some EU states do not yet have the capacity to do this. EU membership means that Britain has access to the Schengen II database, which has details of 250,000 wanted or missing suspects across Europe. The flow of foreign fighters returning from Syria has extended the EU databases tracking their movements.Countries such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Portugal flag up potentially dangerous people so that they can be turned away at the border, but some EU states do not yet have the capacity to do this. EU membership means that Britain has access to the Schengen II database, which has details of 250,000 wanted or missing suspects across Europe. The flow of foreign fighters returning from Syria has extended the EU databases tracking their movements.
Q: So the system does not always work?Q: So the system does not always work?
A: That’s right, and the Vote Leave dossier catalogues 50 cases of convicted criminals who should have been excluded but were only picked up at a later stage, sometimes after they had committed further serious crimes in Britain.A: That’s right, and the Vote Leave dossier catalogues 50 cases of convicted criminals who should have been excluded but were only picked up at a later stage, sometimes after they had committed further serious crimes in Britain.
Q: How can this be fixed?Q: How can this be fixed?
A: Nick Clegg has proposed focusing on sharing conviction information on the most serious offences, such as murder and rape. The government has also opted back into a series of criminal justice measures known as the Prüm package, which allows the sharing of information on suspected criminals, such as fingerprints and DNA, and which many Eurosceptics voted against. It seems unlikely that taking Britain out of the EU would persuade its European partners to put more effort into sharing information about convicted criminals with the UK.A: Nick Clegg has proposed focusing on sharing conviction information on the most serious offences, such as murder and rape. The government has also opted back into a series of criminal justice measures known as the Prüm package, which allows the sharing of information on suspected criminals, such as fingerprints and DNA, and which many Eurosceptics voted against. It seems unlikely that taking Britain out of the EU would persuade its European partners to put more effort into sharing information about convicted criminals with the UK.
Verdict: EU membership does not stop the UK turning away convicted serious criminals at its borders. But further EU integration in the shape of more information sharing could make this more effective.Verdict: EU membership does not stop the UK turning away convicted serious criminals at its borders. But further EU integration in the shape of more information sharing could make this more effective.