International Journal of Law And Criminology
15
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue01 2025
PAGE NO.
15-19
10.37547/ijlc/Volume05Issue01-04
Counter-terrorism Strategies of the European Union
Member States: Legal Foundations and Implementation
Mechanisms Comparative Analysis
OCHILOV Shermat
Independent Researcher of TSUL, Uzbekistan
Received:
26 October 2024;
Accepted:
29 December 2024;
Published:
24 January 2025
Abstract:
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the European Union's counter-terrorism strategies,
focusing on their legal foundations and implementation mechanisms. The research examines the historical
evolution of counter-terrorism cooperation in Europe from the 1970s to the present day, including pivotal
developments such as the formation of the TREVI group, the adoption of the 1977 European Convention on
Counter-Terrorism, and the post-9/11 policy shifts. Special attention is given to the 2005 EU Counter-Terrorism
Strategy and its four pillars: prevention, protection, pursuit, and response. The study analyzes the institutional
framework established for counter-terrorism cooperation, including the role of the EU Counter-Terrorism
Coordinator and the European Counter-Terrorism Centre within Europol. The research also evaluates the
effectiveness of various EU security initiatives, particularly the 2015 European Security Agenda, highlighting both
achievements and challenges in implementation. The paper identifies current problems in EU counter-terrorism
efforts, such as disparities in member states' implementation approaches, limitations in anti-radicalization
measures, and the challenge of balancing security measures with civil liberties. Furthermore, it proposes specific
recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of the EU's counter-terrorism framework, including the
establishment of an independent monitoring system, modernization of anti-radicalization programs, and
development of legal and ethical standards for using advanced technologies in counter-terrorism efforts.
Keywords:
European Union, counter-terrorism strategy, legal framework, implementation mechanisms, security
policy, TREVI group, institutional cooperation, international cooperation, cybersecurity, law enforcement
cooperation, security agenda, terrorist threat.
Introduction:
Counter-terrorism efforts are being
implemented through comprehensive initiatives not
only in the international arena but also within regional
organizations.
In
particular,
among
regional
organizations, the European Union plays a crucial role
in counter-terrorism. This regional organization has
developed and is implementing comprehensive
programs and initiatives aimed at ensuring security
both within and beyond their territories. Their efforts
are directed not only at preventing terrorist attacks but
also at combating the root causes of radicalization and
extremism.
The issue of counter-terrorism in European Union
member states dates back to the 1970s-80s. The initial
steps to strengthen cooperation in Europe in the fight
against terrorism were taken in the 1970s. During this
period, various European Union member states faced
major terrorist attacks on their territories by groups
such as the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization),
ETA, IRA, Italy's Red Brigades, and RAF (Red Army
Faction). In 1976, following several intergovernmental
meetings on counter-terrorism dedicated to terrorist
attacks in the early 1970s, the TREVI group was
established by European Union member states. TREVI
served as a forum for cooperation between interior and
justice ministers in the field of internal security, with
particular emphasis on counter-terrorism. In 1985,
TREVI's scope was expanded to include authority to
combat illegal immigration and organized crime.
The 1977 European Convention on Counter-Terrorism
International Journal of Law And Criminology
16
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
imposed on ratifying states the obligation to apply the
principle of 'aut dedere aut judicare' (extradite or
prosecute) in cases of terrorist offenses or criminal acts
related to terrorism [20]. This obligation was a new
development in EU crime fighting, as throughout
modern history, terrorism had been primarily viewed
as a political crime, and according to this principle,
European states could not guarantee extradition in
terrorism cases [21].
This requirement was important for several reasons:
historically, many countries had refused extradition for
political crimes as this was seen as a means of
protection from political persecution. Since terrorism
often involved the use of violence for political
purposes, it was frequently interpreted as a political
crime. The convention proposed to consider terrorism
as an ordinary crime and remove it from the category
of political crimes, which significantly strengthened
cooperation between countries [22].
Although the Convention permitted extradition for
terrorism charges, member states could still refuse
extradition in certain cases: if the crime was political in
nature or based on political motives; also, if there was
a risk of persecution by the requesting state based on
race, nationality, religion, or political beliefs [1]. These
provisions were aimed at maintaining a balance
between fighting terrorism and protecting human
rights.
In the 1980s, some counter-terrorism mechanisms
were incorporated into the European Union's legal
framework through the Schengen Agreement and the
Maastricht Treaty. Counter-terrorism policy and crime
prevention initiatives in Europe were particularly
developed after the 2001 US events, the 2004 Madrid
events, and the 2005 London events. It was during this
period that major counter-terrorism initiatives were
implemented in Europe.
Following the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US,
the European Union (EU) implemented several
initiatives to combat terrorism. These initiatives
included: an action plan to be implemented by member
states and EU institutions to combat terrorism [2];
developing a comprehensive definition of terrorism
and those who carry it out - something that had not
been done before within the EU [3]; and adopting a
fundamental decision defining the EU's approach to
terrorism to support the treaty's commitment to
creating an "area of freedom, security and justice" [4]
Two action plans adopted in the European region in
2001 and 2002 continued to standardize and
strengthen the EU's various established approaches to
counter-terrorism. Most importantly, they included
active cooperation on police and judicial matters.
Although counter-terrorism efforts appeared to slow
down in the European Union during 2003, the
European Security Strategy (ESS) was adopted in
December 2003[5]. This comprehensive Strategy was
developed by the EU High Representative for Common
Foreign and Security Policy. It identified five key
threats: terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, regional conflicts, state failure, and
organized crime. The European Security Strategy was
"the EU's first strategic document" and marked an
"important step" for EU external actions[6]. By
presenting a "comprehensive or holistic approach to
security," the European Security Strategy gave the
Council certain basic authority to develop other
strategies, such as the counter-terrorism strategy.
Along with endorsing the European Security Strategy,
the EU focused immediate attention on four key areas
to support the implementation of this new Security
Strategy, one of which was terrorism. As the EU's first
strategy, the European Security Strategy laid the
foundation for more targeted strategies in the future.
As in 2001, the Council adopted a "Declaration on EU
Intentions
Against
Terrorism."
Through
this
declaration, it again planned to further improve EU
counter-terrorism actions, assist victims, and develop
existing cooperation [7]. Through the declaration, it put
forward proposals to identify terrorism as a major
threat to the EU in the European Security Strategy.
Furthermore, it called for the creation of new "mini-
strategies" on terrorism within the Union and the
development of "a long-term EU Strategy that would
take into account all factors contributing to terrorism"
[7]. The declaration also called on member states to
"fully and immediately implement" existing legal
measures against terrorism [7].
Following the terrorist acts in London in 2005, several
initiatives were implemented in the region. First,
another declaration was adopted, condemning the
terrorist
attacks,
emphasizing
solidarity,
and
reaffirming the commitment to fight terrorism through
faster implementation of the adopted action plans and
commitments confirmed in the plans[8]. This
declaration also emphasized the importance of
developing a "global counter-terrorism strategy."
Immediately after the attack, the Counter-Terrorism
Coordinator and the Committee of Permanent
Representatives (COREPER) began discussions on how
to update the EU approach [9]. Four months after the
attacks, the EU and the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator
presented a draft Counter-Terrorism Strategy to the
Committee of Permanent Representatives. The
"Counter-Terrorism Strategy" was adopted in 2005.
This elevated the region's counter-terrorism policy to a
new, higher, and more effective level. The strategy
International Journal of Law And Criminology
17
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
encompasses four directions: prevention, protection,
pursuit, and response. These four directions reflect the
EU's comprehensive and multifaceted approach to
counter-terrorism.
The adoption of this strategy in the European Union
marked a crucial turning point in EU counter-terrorism
policy. First, it formed a unified and harmonized
approach to counter-terrorism within the EU. This, in
turn, enabled strengthened cooperation between
member states and efficient use of resources. Second,
the strategy made counter-terrorism one of the EU's
priority directions and created opportunities for
allocating more attention and resources to this area.
The most important legal aspect of the strategy is that
it gave the EU authority to initiate legislation in the field
of counter-terrorism and harmonize member states'
national legislation. This, in turn, led to the formation
of a unified legal space in the field of counter-terrorism
within the EU.
The strategy achieved significant success in forming a
unified approach to counter-terrorism within the EU
and strengthening cooperation between member
states. As Bures noted, the strategy formed the EU's
first comprehensive and integrated approach to
counter-terrorism [10]. This, in turn, enabled the EU's
counter-terrorism policy to become more coordinated
and effective. Another important aspect of the
strategy, as Kaunert and Leonard put it, is that it
initiated the process of forming "collective security" in
counter-terrorism within the EU [11]. This, in turn,
forced the EU to pay more attention to counter-
terrorism issues not only in internal but also in external
policy.
Furthermore,
the
adoption
of
the
strategy
strengthened the EU's institutional structure in
counter-terrorism. In particular, the establishment of
the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator position and the
European Counter-Terrorism Centre within Europol
enabled more effective coordination of EU activities in
this area.
However, several problems also emerged during the
strategy's implementation. First, differences were
observed between member states in approaches to
implementing the strategy. While some states actively
supported and quickly implemented the strategy,
others moved more slowly in this process. This slowed
down the process of forming a unified counter-
terrorism space within the EU.
Second, certain aspects of the strategy, especially
measures for preventing radicalization, did not produce
the expected results in practice.
Third, the issue of maintaining balance between
security measures and civil liberties emerged during
the strategy's implementation.
The European Union's 2005 Counter-Terrorism
Strategy marked a paradigm shift in EU security policy.
The strategy not only created new institutional and
legal foundations for counter-terrorism but also
changed the EU's approach in this area from reactive to
proactive. The strategy's four pillars - prevention,
protection, pursuit, and response - provided a
comprehensive approach to counter-terrorism. To
further improve the European Union's counter-
terrorism strategy and increase its effectiveness, the
following comprehensive measures are considered
appropriate:
First, it is necessary to create an independent,
multifaceted monitoring system to regularly track the
strategy's implementation and objectively evaluate its
results. This system should include an oversight council
with civil society representatives, supervised by a
special commission of the European Parliament. Based
on monitoring results, analytical reports should be
prepared quarterly, and annual public reports should
be published. This process serves to increase the
strategy's effectiveness and adapt it to new conditions.
Second, existing anti-radicalization programs need to
be reviewed based on modern socio-economic realities
and scientific research results. This process should
involve leading specialists in social sciences,
psychology, and criminology, as well as strengthen
cooperation with public organizations and local
government bodies. Updated programs should
consider not only ideological but also socio-economic
factors and be adapted to target groups' needs.
Third, it is necessary to develop legal and ethical
standards for using artificial intelligence, big data
analysis, and other advanced technologies in counter-
terrorism efforts. This process should be carried out by
an expert group under the European Commission,
include study of international experience, and involve
broad public discussion. The developed standards
should ensure balance between security needs and
personal data protection, while also being adaptable to
technological development rates [22, 23].
Fourth, it is necessary to review the EU's cooperation
policy with third countries in the field of counter-
terrorism. The new approach should prioritize not only
operational cooperation but also human rights,
democratic principles, and the rule of law. Cooperation
agreements should include mechanisms ensuring
adherence to these principles and also provide for
supporting
partner
countries'
socio-economic
development.
Fifth, it is necessary to create a special platform within
the EU for coordinating counter-terrorism research
International Journal of Law And Criminology
18
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
activities and implementing results into practice. This
platform should ensure regular dialogue and
experience
exchange
between
researchers,
policymakers, and practitioners, as well as create
conditions for testing innovative ideas and approaches.
Platform activities should be funded and supported
within the framework of relevant EU research
programs.
The comprehensive implementation of these proposals
will enable raising the European Union's counter-
terrorism strategy to a new level, increasing its
effectiveness, and providing more effective responses
to modern threats.
One of the other important programs in counter-
terrorism in the European region is undoubtedly the
European Union (EU) Security Agenda adopted in 2015
[12]. The EU's security policy has undergone a long and
complex evolution. Initially, European integration was
mainly focused on economic cooperation, but over
time, security issues also became important. The
Maastricht Treaty signed in 1992 established the EU's
"Common Foreign and Security Policy," which allowed
the EU to play a more active role in the international
arena [13]. With the Amsterdam Treaty coming into
force in 1999, the "European Security and Defense
Policy" was established, which allowed the EU to act
more independently in security and defense areas [14].
Several factors influenced the adoption of the EU
Security Agenda in 2015. First, terrorist attacks in
Europe, particularly the November 2015 Paris terrorist
attacks, prompted a review of EU security policy.
Second, the problem of foreign fighters who left Europe
to join conflicts in Syria and Iraq and later returned
became a serious security threat for the EU. Third, new
risks associated with digital technology development,
particularly cybercrime and cybersecurity issues, made
cyber matters a priority in EU security policy. Fourth,
security issues related to illegal migration and border
crossing became urgent problems for the EU. Fifth,
radicalization processes in Europe, especially among
youth, concerned EU security policymakers.
The EU Security Agenda adopted in 2015 included
several important directions. The program's main focus
was
on
counter-terrorism
and
preventing
radicalization. This direction includes measures to
combat terrorist organizations and their financial
sources, address the problem of returning fighters,
identify and prevent radicalization processes, and
counter terrorist propaganda and extremist ideas. This
involves strengthening information exchange and
cooperation between EU member states, as well as
developing cooperation with third countries.
Among other regulations and documents adopted in
this area are the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on
the Prevention of Terrorism [15], the 2015 Additional
Protocol to the 2005 Convention [16], the EU's 2017
Counter-Terrorism Directive [17], the EU's 2018 Fifth
Anti-Money Laundering Directive [18], and the EU's
2021 Regulation on preventing the dissemination of
terrorist content online[19], which all incorporated
important provisions for counter-terrorism in the
European region.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, while international documents adopted
for counter-terrorism in the European region pay great
attention to strengthening regional cooperation,
combating terrorism financing, and ensuring security,
there are also critical views regarding certain aspects of
these documents, particularly concerning the
definition of terrorism, protection of human rights, and
personal data protection. This indicates the need to
improve these documents and develop new ones in the
future.
REFERENCES
Wilkinson, P. (2005), Chaillot Paper n°84: International
terrorism: the changing threat and the EU’s response,
Paris: Institute for Security Studies.
“Council Common Position of 27 December 2001 on the
application of specific measures to combat terrorism
(2001/931/CFSP),” Official Jou
rnal of the European
Communities, L344 (December 28, 2001): 93-96.
Harald Müller, Terrorism, Proliferation: A European
Threat Assessment, Chaillot Paper no. 58 (Paris: EU
Institute for Security Studies, 2003), 5.
“The Consolidated Version of the Treaty on
European
Union,” Official Journal of the European Communities,
C325 (December 24, 2002), 11.
EUROPEAN
SECURITY
STRATEGY
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/30823/qc78
09568enc.pdf
Sven Biscop, The European Security Strategy: A Global
Agenda for Positive Power (Burlington, VT: Ashgate
Publishing, 2005), viii
Council, “Declaration on Combating Terrorism,” March
24, 2004.
Council of the European Union, “Extraordinary Council
Meeting, Justice and Home Affairs,” Document
11116/05 (Presse 187), July 13, 2005
http://ue.eu.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en
/jha/85703.pdf
Council of the European Union, Presidency and the
Counterterrorism Coordinator, “Towards a Counter
-
Terrorism Strategy for the European Union,” 13613/05,
October
21,
2005,
International Journal of Law And Criminology
19
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijlc
International Journal of Law And Criminology (ISSN: 2771-2214)
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/05/st13/st
13613.en05.pdf
BURES, Oldrich. "EU Counterterrorism Policy: A Paper
Tiger?". Published on Taylor & Francis Online 2007, pp.
57-78.
Kaunert, C., Léonard, S., 2019. The collective
securitisation of terrorism in the European Union. West
European Politics 42, 261
–
277.
Elektron resurs: COMMUNICATION FROM THE
COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
The European Agenda on Security https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0185
Keukeleire, Stephan and J Macnaughtan. “The foreign
policy of the European Union.” (2008).
SHEPHERD, ALISTAIR. (2007). Security and Defence
Policy in the European Union - By J. Howorth. Journal of
Common
Market
Studies.
45.
1166-1167.
10.1111/j.1468-5965.2007.00764_9.x.
Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of
Terrorism // https://rm.coe.int/16808c3f55
Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe
Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism //
https://rm.coe.int/168047c5ea
DIRECTIVE (EU) 2017/541 OF THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 15 March 2017
on combating terrorism and replacing Council
Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending
Council
Decision
2005/671/JHA
https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017L0541
Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive
(EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the
financial system for the purposes of money laundering
or terrorist financing, and amending Directives
2009/138/EC and 2013/36/EU // https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018L0843
Regulation (EU) 2021/784 of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 29 April 2021 on addressing the
dissemination of terrorist content online //
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R0784
Umarkhanova, D. (2024). DEVELOPMENT TRENDS OF
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
IN THE EUROPEAN REGION. Ижтимоий
-
гуманитар
фанларнинг долзарб муаммолари Актуальные
проблемы социально
-
гуманитарных наук Actual
Problems of Humanities and Social Sciences., 4(S/6).
https://doi.org/10.47390/SPR1342V4SI6Y2024N01
Egamberdiev, D. (2021). Formation Of Joint
Investigation Teams Between States, And Their
International And National Legal Basis. Ilkogretim
Online, 20(3).
УМАРХАНОВА Д. Organization of the groups of
investigation and operative investigation as a form of
international cooperation on criminal cases //Юридик
фанлар аҳборотномаси. –
2018.
–
№. 2. –
С. 46
-50.
Egamberdiyev D. Type of legal assistance in criminal
cases creation of joint investigation teams− on the
example of EU countries //International Journal of Law
and Criminology.
–
2023.
–
Т. 3. –
№. 06. –
С. 85
-94.
Умарханова Д. ОРГАНИЗАЦИЯ СЛЕДСТВЕННОЙ И
ОПЕРАТИВНО
-
СЛЕДСТВЕННОЙ ГРУПП КАК ФОРМА
МЕЖДУНАРОДНОГО
СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВА
ПО
УГОЛОВНЫМ ДЕЛАМ //Review of law sciences. –
2018.
–
№. 2. –
С. 46
-50.
