competing tendencies, with fragmentation and unification occurring simultaneously.

Malcolm Anderson, "The Agenda for Police Cooperation," in Policing Across National Boundaries, Malcolm Anderson and Monica den Boer (eds.). New York: Pinter Publishers, 1994.

Malcolm Anderson, professor at the Univer- sity of Edinburgh, addresses the implications for policing in individual European states as a result of closer police cooperation within Europe. With greater cross-border policing, there will be increased pressure for the har- monization of criminal justice procedures. Pressures will build for automatic extradition. This tendency may lead to a push for "Eurocrimes," a trend to identify serious crimes with uniform definitions and similar penalties across state boundaries. With such uniform definitions, Europol could function with real police powers.

The Schengen system and Europol require general rules on data protection. This system is needed not only for intelligence purposes but also to protect civil liberties. The move for such protections is not arising from within the law enforcement community, even though Anderson believes they should give more at- tention to this issue.

Pressure will also build for a central facil- ity in each country in order that other coun- tries in the European system may stay in contact with each other. With the large-scale financial fraud in the European Union, there will be increasing efforts to cooperate, but the different legal approaches of the European countries to fraud make enhanced cooperation difficult to institute.

To increase police cooperation, more ex- changes among police forces, common train- ing facilities for officers engaged in these cooperative efforts, and common training modules are needed. With increased coopera- tion, there will be more potential for officers to seek legal favors that may affect objectiv- ity of performance. Therefore, greater account-

ability will be required of officers involved in European cooperation.

Anderson asserts that the growing transnational character of crime will most likely lead to greater public acceptance of close law enforcement and judicial coopera- tion. The media and the public will also com- ment on the law enforcement practices of other countries with which they are now more closely associated.

Alain Guyomarch, "Problems and Pros- pects for European Police Cooperation after Maastricht," Policing and Society, Vol. 5, 1995.

Guyomarch, deputy director of the European Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, suggests that the provision of the Maastricht treaty, particularly the es- tablishment of the "Third Pillar," has led member states to maintain an intergovemmen- tal approach to judicial policy rather than as- sume a supranational approach.

The author highlights four elements that have contributed to the difficulties and slow pace of police cooperation in the European Union. First is the absence of a foundation in the Treaties of Paris and Rome upon which to build joint policy initiatives for policing. Sec- ond, there is a lack of consensus among the European nations concerning crime problems and the responses necessary to combat these problems. Third, police and judicial structures among member states are diverse and com- plex, making cooperation difficult. Finally, institutionalizing police cooperation is met with some skepticism by member states, who fear that the national authority of individual states will be weakened.

EU member states will face difficulties reaching common policies related to policing and judicial matters due to different existing laws and rules as well as the absence of simi- lar rules for such issues as extradition. Ac- cording to Guyomarch, this problem is further aggravated by a lack of knowledge of other police structures, tensions among police and

EUROPEAN INTEGRATION AND CROss-BoRDER POLICING 101