IT is quite possible that the EU will achieve monetary union before it works out common criminal justice structures for dealing with people such as Marc Dutroux, the man facing charges of kidnapping and murdering young girls in Belgium and suspected of being at the centre of a Europe-wide paedophile ring.

Europe's "Third Pillar" of integration, on issues of policing and judicial systems, has been so beset by bureaucratic wrangling that it is no more than a virtual reality.

The public reaction to Marc Dutroux and his young victims may change this. The EU may finally be learning that its children are as important as its currency problems.

Earlier this week, in a move barely remarked upon, the Government announced that, under its presidency of the EU, it had "presented proposals" to other member-states to "combat illicit trafficking in human persons

This unfortunate use of Eurospeak was followed by a proposal to build up the tiny Europol Drugs Unit and give it power to tackle the exploitation and sexual abuse of children.

European paedophiles such as Marc Dutroux already have trans-national networks. The European Union has none. The European Union managed to dispose of its internal border controls without placing any criminal justice structures in place to deal with the predicted rise in cross-border crime.

The proposal to beef up Europol will be put before the meeting of European justice and interior ministers in Dublin on September 26th/27th.

There may be a sense of deja vu in this for the Department of Justice officials who have striven in the past to achieve some form of concrete reality for Europe's "Third Pillar".

SIX years ago, during Ireland's last presidency, there were hopes that "Europol", the agency specifically referred to in this latest proposal, was to have become a European law agency like the FBI in the United States.

Almost no progress has been made since then. Europol has an office in The Hague, but it has only 110 employees, all on secondment from the 60 or so national and regional police forces in Europe.

Europol's founding charter has still not been ratified by all EU member-states. Indeed, its expansion is actively opposed by some states, most notably Britain and France.

European police forces simply do not trust each other and in some states there is undisguised rivalry and distrust between regional forces.

Part of the scandal surrounding the Dutroux case in Belgium has been the suspicion that the police and magistrates of the country do not co-operate with each other.

The lack of harmonisation in Europe's criminal law is critically exposed in respect of the disparity in laws relating to the sexual exploitation and abuse of children.

Even between the Republic and Britain there are disparities which could work to the obvious benefit of paedophiles.

It is not illegal in this State to possess paedophile pornography, only to do so with the intent of supplying others.

There is no law here governing the accessing of paedophile pornography on the Internet. There is such a law in Britain. Under the Obscene Publications Act and the Protection of Children Act, Internet service providers (ISPs) who allow access to paedophile "news groups" can be prosecuted.

It is quite possible that a man facing charges in Britain could come to this State and use the courts here to block his extradition.

Advances are being made, but usually only on a bilateral basis between police forces rather than on a EU basis.

Some European police forces employ computer technicians to scan suspicious Internet sites. If these technicians locate a paedophile, the information is passed to the police force in the relevant state.

SWEDEN has a database on child sex abusers which has already provided evidence in successful prosecutions in Germany.

Probably the biggest successes have been in the United States. Recently, the Federal authorities breached a paedophile ring which was using the Internet to watch live videotaping of a nine-year-old girl being sexually abused.

However, the vast range of legal and technical problems concerning the governance of paedophile pornography on the Internet is a minefield.

It is possible for police to direct companies which provide Internet services to prohibit access to "news groups" which are used to trade the pornography. However, this can have potentially worse effects.

It was reported in the United States last year that service providers had been ordered to sever access to a site which contained pornographic pictures of children. However, once the site had been cut off it was found that the paedophiles had moved their pornography to another news group which had previously been dedicated to quite innocent discussions of Disney films. The Disney news group was one which children were much more likely to access.

Internet providers in Britain are now trying to draw up a system of protocol to dissuade paedophilcs from abusing the system. The providers insist that service blocking is not the answer, especially when the material is simply displaced into areas where it can be accidentally encountered by children.