Towards a citizens’ EU? Lamassoure report and French presidency

The free movement of persons is a fine principle, but in his 2008 report Alain Lamassoure MEP described the problems mobile EU citizens faced in real life with regard to cross-border healthcare, social security, the recognition of diplomas and professional qualifications, car registration and exports, fragmented consumer markets and consumer protection standards, and family and inheritance law, to name just a few.

In a nutshell, Lamassoure concluded that (page 32-33):

In practical terms, citizens need security and legal simplicity just as businesses do…Laws are not made for their authors, nor for the philosophers – but for their subjects, in the sense of the people who have to abide by the law. There are cases where abuses of subsidiarity are more to be feared than abuses of uniformity.

Referring to Eurobarometer opinion polls, Lamassoure stated that more than 9 out of 10 people want judicial cooperation in civil matters, particularly in family matters (page 44).

Based on the problems, needs and opinions, Lamassoure entered into a lengthy discussion about the relative merits of directly applicable regulations versus directives transposed into national legislation, including the quality of transposition and infringement procedures (page 48-55).

After discussing the adoption and transposition of European laws, Lamassoure turned to the citizen facing the national administrations (from page 56). He presented the various EU information channels and advisory services, often little known among the public. Thereafter he gave examples of bewildering administrative practices, with cross-border workers in some areas especially frustrated. There is a gap between European case law and legal acts on the one hand, and application on the ground on the other hand. Further, he discussed problems related to legal remedies.

It is somewhat depressing to see how complex and intractable the every day problems can be for mobile Europeans.

The report was requested by the president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, and drafted by a French member of the European Parliament, Alain Lamassoure, ahead of the French presidency of the Council of the European Union, so many of the proposals for improvement are directed at the French government preparing to chair the European Council and the different Council configurations. But Lamassoure’s broad canvas includes a considerable number of suggestions for the EU institutions and the member states.

The report is a natural introduction to the various issues concerning EU citizens in cross-border situations, and it serves as the basis for evaluating later EU actions and laws intended to improve their situation.

The report exists in at least three language versions, the French original, a German translation and the English translation we have used here:

Alain LAMASSOURE, Député européen: LE CITOYEN ET L’APPLICATION DU DROIT COMMUNAUTAIRE Rapport au Président de la République (8 juin 2008 ; 188 pages)

Alain LAMASSOURE, Mitglied des Europäischen Parlaments: DER BÜRGER UND DIE ANWENDUNG DES GEMEINSCHAFTSRECHTS Bericht an den Staatspräsidenten( 8. Juni 2008)

Alain LAMASSOURE, Member of the European Parliament: THE CITIZEN AND THE APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY LAW Report to the President of the Republic (8th June 2008)

Where did it lead, if anywhere?


French EU Council presidency

President Nicolas Sarkozy and French public opinion seemed to be in unison with regard to the need to protect French (and EU citizens) from the “threats” of globalisation, but it is hard to see traces of the Lamassoure report or active but mundane efforts to improve the rights of ordinary EU citizens in the work of the French presidency of the Council of the European Union.

At least, this is the impression I get from the midterm review of the French EU Council presidency written by two outside experts:

Christian Lequesne and Olivier Rozenberg: The French Presidency of 2008: The Unexpected Agenda (Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies Sieps 2008:3op; 57 pages)

Is this a lopsided view?


Ralf Grahn



P.S. Bit more complicated… is a very human blog, where rose22joh writes about British and European politics, parenting, faith and life, none of them easy to combine; this makes for interesting reading.

Improve information about EU citizens’ rights!

Ensuring correct implementation of the Citizens Directive 2004/38 by all EU member states has proven to be a tough task for the European Commission (brief background history in Swedish).



The Directive 2004/38 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States is mentioned only once in the twelve pages of the Commission’s 27th annual report on monitoring the application of EU law (2009); Brussels, 1.10.2010 COM(2010) 538 final:

Following the Metock judgment [C-127/08], guidelines were discussed in the expert group on the application of Directive 2004/38 before the launch of a programme of bilateral meetings with all Member States on the transposition of EU rules on free movement of citizens and their family members.

Commission staff documents missing



We saw that the monitoring report from the Commission was accompanied by two SEC documents. However, if you search for SEC(2010) 1143 or 1144 under SEC documents on Eur-Lex, you get the less than helpful reply ‘Not available in English’.

I wonder: Why has the Commission posted only the brief overview, but omitted the ‘beef’, which is contained in the detailed annexes?



EP Legislative observatory Oeil



Even the Legislative observatory Oeil of the European Parliament does not list the accompanying documents with the report from the Commission COM(2010) 538 in the customary manner, but if we are resilient enough to search for the annexes separately we actually find what we are looking for.

Searching should be easier.



Sector by sector analysis


We find a hefty 512 page document with more detailed analysis sector by sector, a treasure trove for researchers and lawyers:




Commission staff working document: Situation in the different sectors; Brussels, 1.10.2010 SEC(2010) 1143 final; 512 pages.

There are numerous references to the sad state of implementation of Directive 2004/38. I am going to quote just two examples.

The first one is in section 3.1.1.2. Report on progress made in 2009 regarding free movement of workers (on page 62):

The Commission services have received many queries and complaints concerning the residence rights of migrant workers in the host Member State. It is still partly due to the fact that in May 2006, Directive 2004/38/EC effectively entered into force and introduced new residence formalities and some important new rights (such as the right of permanent residence). With a view to ensuring the respect of the provisions of Directive 2004/38/EC, the Commission services have been organising bilateral contacts with Member States to make sure that the Directive is correctly transposed and applied across the EU.

My second example is in the section 14.6. Free movement of persons (from page 439, the quote from the following page), where the Commission indicates the state of free movement of persons:

In 2009, the Commission continued to deal with a large number of enquiries and complaints in the area of free movement of persons – 1000 were replied in 2009 compared with 1070 in 2008. Complaints management was also a significant part of ensuring full and proper implementation of Directive 2004/38/EC. In 2009, 205 complaints were registered with the Secretariat-General (compared with 81 registered in 2008).

There were 37 written EP questions and 36 petitions in the area of free movement of persons in 2009.

Statistical annex

The other accompanying document is (part of?) a statistical annex, with 118 pages of detailed information about procedures:



Commission staff working document: Statistical annex - Annexes I to III (Volume 1); Brussels, 1.10.2010 SEC(2010) 1144 final



Comments

The Commission and the European Parliament should do more to inform about problems concerning the implementation of EU law, and to foster debate on these issues. This includes the enforcement of the rights of EU citizens and their families to free movement and residence.

I hope that the European Parliament takes a close look at citizens’ rights when it starts to evaluate the report on the application of EU law in 2009.

In mid October 2010 we are still looking at a report regarding 2009, however forward-looking the Commission has tried to make it.

There is a need for more timely information. The Commission has an opportunity to show its dedication to citizens’ rights, including Directive 2004/38, when it communicates its actions with regard to Paris and the other capitals.



The new Directorate-General Justice has formally updated its web pages, but the newsroom and the other pages are still more burdened by history than filled with complete and updated information. You have to go to the pages of justice commissioner Viviane Reding, which are more up to date (see News, Press releases and Speeches), but there are still many cracks between the floor boards.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. Nowadays it is increasingly hard to find European enterprises, public authorities or interest groups without an active social media presence, or a stake in European Union affairs. Politics, policies, economics and law at a EU level are becoming more important in a globalising world, at least if Europeans still want to weigh in.

EU-related blogs are a significant aspect of the emerging European online public space. There are now 673 Euroblogs, or blogs related to European Union (and Council of Europe) affairs, listed on Bloggingportal.eu, the multilingual aggregator.



You can take a look at the stream of all new posts, or follow the editors’ choices on the front page. You can also subscribe to the streams (all or highlighted) and the newsletters (daily or weekly) without cost.



Bloggingportal.eu needs a few more voluntary editors for the daily tagging of posts according to subjects. Why not increase your understanding of European affairs, improve your language skills and do something useful by joining the team of editors?

EU: Application of Community Law

Yesterday the European Parliament fired a broadside against the Commission’s handling of its responsibilities and its failures to remedy the problems the EP had remarked upon earlier.

The application of Community law is a cornerstone of the European Union. As “guardian of the Treaties”, the Commission has a duty to monitor the correct implementation of Community legislation, which is crucial for EU citizens and businesses engaged in cross-border activities.


Yesterday’s resolution is an example that seemingly dull reports can be both “hot stuff” and important for citizens and businesses.

***

European Parliament

On Friday, the European Parliament voted on a resolution based on a report by the Committee on Legal Affairs (rapporteur Monica Frassoni) with regard to the application of Community Law. The resolution was adopted by 297 votes, against 13, with 7 abstentions.

At this stage, you can find the adopted resolution in the compilation of texts adopted Friday 24 April 2009 (from page 311).


The exact references are:

P6_TA-PROV(2009)0335

25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007)

European Parliament resolution of 24 April 2009 on the 25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007) (2008/2337(INI))

***

Parliamentary scrutiny

The main document under scrutiny was the 25th annual report from the Commission on monitoring the application of Community law (2007) (COM(2008)0777).

The accompanying Commission staff working documents (SEC(2008)2854 and SEC(2008)2855), as well as the Commission Communication of 5 September 2007 entitled “A Europe of results – applying Community law” (COM(2007)0502), and the Commission Communication of 20 March 2002 on relations with the complainant in respect of infringements of Community law (COM(2002)0141), formed the basis for the EP’s own initiative report.

The resolution is critical of the Commission’s activities as the “guardian of the Treaties”.

The European Parliament regrets that, unlike in the past, the Commission has not responded in any way to the issues raised by Parliament in its previous resolutions, in particular its resolution of 21 February 2008; notes the lack of significant improvement with regard to the three fundamental issues of transparency, resources and the length of procedures.


The rest of the resolution lists specific criticisms of the Commission’s handling of one of its core tasks.

***

Citizenship Directive

I would like to pick out one detail, of concrete interest to EU citizens and their families, the resolution text concerning the so called Citizenship Directive 2004/38/EC (point 15), where the criticism is aimed more at the member states than at the Commission:


Notes that the Commission has declared that a fundamental directive such as Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States has for all practical purposes not been properly transposed in any Member State; notes that the Commission has received more than 1 800 individual complaints in relation to that directive, registering 115 of them as complaints and opening five cases of infringement on the grounds of failure to apply the directive properly, recognises that the Commission has worked with Parliament to useful effect and in a spirit of openness where Directive 2004/38/EC is concerned; endorses the Commission’s proposed approach, whereby the directive is to be kept under continuous and exhaustive review, support, in the form of guidelines to be published in the first half of 2009, is to be provided to help Member States apply the directive fully and properly, and infringement proceedings are to be instituted against Member States whose legislation does not conform to the directive; expresses grave concern, however, as to the Commission’s ability to perform its role as “guardian of the Treaty” and the opportunity afforded to Parliament to check the complaint registration policy implemented by the various Commission departments;

***


The resolution is instructive reading for everyone interested in the rights of EU citizens and businesses, and together with the Commission documents it offers a number of avenues for reasearch.

Even if an own initiative report is not legally binding, it would be surprising if the Commission does not spring into action after the broadside delivered by the European Parliament.


Ralf Grahn

European Parliament: Rules of Procedure

Within the treaty framework, the European Parliament adopts and amends its Rules of Procedure, without binding the other institutions or third parties.

The Rules of Procedure regulate the main part of decision-making and procedures within the European Parliament.

Clearer references to the version in force and amendments, as well as when they enter into force and possibly lapse, could be recommended with a view to making life easier for researchers and students of EU law and politics, if no such needs are felt within the EP.





***

Current treaty

Article 199 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), as published in the consolidated version of the treaties in force in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 29.12.2006 C 321 E/135, concerns two aspects of the European Parliament:

1) adopting the Rules of Procedure, and
2) publishing the proceedings.


Article 199 TEC

The European Parliament shall adopt its Rules of Procedure, acting by a majority of its Members.

The proceedings of the European Parliament shall be published in the manner laid down in its Rules of Procedure.


***

Original Lisbon Treaty

Article 2, point 187 of the original Treaty of Lisbon amended the second paragraph of Article 197 TEC (OJEU 17.12.2007 C 306/103):


187) In the second paragraph of Article 199, the words ‘manner laid down in its Rules of Procedure’ shall be replaced by ‘manner laid down in the Treaties and in its Rules of Procedure’.


***

Consolidated Lisbon Treaty

In the consolidated (readable) Treaty of Lisbon the slightly amended provision became Article 232 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), published OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/152:


Article 232 TFEU
(ex Article 199 TEC)

The European Parliament shall adopt its Rules of Procedure, acting by a majority of its Members.

The proceedings of the European Parliament shall be published in the manner laid down in the Treaties and in its Rules of Procedure.


***

Autonomy and Rules of Procedure

The adoption of the Rules of Procedure is based on the internal autonomy of the European Parliament, but naturally only within the limits set by the treaties. The Rules of Procedure can only express the EP’s views with regard to interinstitutional relations, but they are not legally binding on the other institutions. (The institutions can bind themselves politically and legally by so called interinstitutional agreements.)


The decision requires a majority of the EP’s members, which is higher than the ordinary rule of a majority of the votes cast (Article 198 TEC; 231 TFEU).


***

Rules of Procedure in force


The Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, 16th edition, have been published in the OJEU 15.2.2005 L 44/1.

The following amendments have been published in the Official Journal:

OJEU 16.12.2006 C 308 E/88-90 Rules 3 and 4

OJEU 23.12.2006 C 317 E/747-748 Rule 81

OJEU 23.12.2006 C 317 E/749 Rules 15 and 182(1), transitional amendments

OJEU 22.12.2006 C 316 E/115-116 Rule 139, transitional amendment


I found no newer consolidated version through Eur-Lex or the Official Journal than the 16th edition mentioned above.


The latest version found through the European Parliament’s web pages is also described as the 16th edition, but dated October 2008:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+RULES-EP+20081022+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN


Supposedly, this is the version in force, but the amendments are not necessarily clearly indicated.


***

Amending the EP’s Rules of Procedure


Adopting the Rules of Procedures is not mentioned, since they already exist, but amendments are regulated by Rule 202


Rule 202 Amendment of the Rules of Procedure

1. Any Member may propose amendments to these Rules and to the annexes thereto accompanied, if appropriate, by short justifications.

Such proposed amendments shall be translated, printed, distributed and referred to the committee responsible, which shall examine them and decide whether to submit them to Parliament.

For the purpose of applying Rules 150, 151 and 155 to consideration of such proposed amendments in Parliament, references made in those Rules to the 'original text' or the 'Commission proposal' shall be considered as referring to the provision in force at the time.

2. Amendments to these Rules shall be adopted only if they secure the votes of a majority of the component Members of Parliament.

3. Unless otherwise specified when the vote is taken, amendments to these Rules and to the annexes thereto shall enter into force on the first day of the partsession following their adoption.


***

Applying the Rules of Procedure

Rule 201 lays down the formal rules for application and interpretation of the Rules of Procedure if doubts arise. In most organisations advice is sought and given on an informal basis, so formal procedures are more the exception than the norm:


Rule 201 Application of the Rules of Procedure

1. Should doubt arise over the application or interpretation of these Rules of Procedure, the President may refer the matter to the committee responsible for examination.

Committee chairs may do so where such a doubt arises in the course of the committee's work and is related to it.

2. The committee shall decide whether it is necessary to propose an amendment to the Rules of Procedure. In this case it shall proceed in accordance with Rule 202.

3. Should the committee decide that an interpretation of the existing Rules is sufficient, it shall forward its interpretation to the President who shall inform Parliament at its next part-session.

4. Should a political group or at least forty Members contest the committee's interpretation, the matter shall be put to the vote in Parliament. Adoption of the text shall be by a majority of the votes cast provided that at least one-third of Parliament's component Members are present. In the event of rejection, the matter shall be referred back to the committee.

5. Uncontested interpretations and interpretations adopted by Parliament shall be appended in italic print as explanatory notes to the appropriate Rule or Rules.

6. Interpretations shall constitute precedents for the future application and interpretation of the Rules concerned.

7. The Rules of Procedure and interpretations shall be reviewed regularly by the committee responsible.

8. Where these Rules confer rights on a specific number of Members, that number shall be automatically adjusted to the nearest whole number representing the same percentage of Parliament's membership whenever the total size of Parliament is increased, notably following enlargements of the European Union.


***

Committee responsible

According to Annex VI.XVIII, point 8, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs is responsible for the interpretation and application of the Rules of Procedure and proposals for amendments thereto.


***

Interinstitutional agreements

According to Rule 120 interinstitutional agreements may be annexed to the Rules of Procedure, and they may lead to modifications of these rules.


***

Points of order

Rule 166 concerns points of order, when a member alleges failure to respect the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure.


***


Possible improvements

For instance when amending the Rules of Procedure, clearer references could be made to the version in force and later amendments, as well as when they enter into force and possibly lapse, with a view to making life easier for researchers and students of EU law and politics, if no such needs are felt within the European Parliament.



Ralf Grahn

Citizens and EU law - The real world

There is an emerging body of EU law for Europeans who travel, move, live, love, work, parent, retire or divorce across borders within the European Union. There are still lacunae, but the application, the realities on the ground, are the main focus of the report Alain Lamassoure MEP has prepared for president Nicolas Sarkozy.

‘Le citoyen et l’application du droit communautaire – Rapport au Président de la République’ (8 June 2008; 188 pages) looks at the problems of EU citizens face outside their country of origin, but inside the European Union. Cross-border families are one example.

The report is posted on a number of web pages. One of them is Toute l’Europe:

http://www.touteleurope.fr/fileadmin/CIEV2/entretiens/Rapport_definitif_8_juin_2008.pdf

The perspective is French: EU citizens living in France and French citizens in other EU countries. But Lamassoure uses materials of general applicability, and he suggests that France uses its Council presidency to propose concrete measures to ameliorate the situation of cross-border persons and to inspire other EU member states to take a closer look at their laws and practices.

Taking into account how much corporations are at the centre of textbooks on European Community law, Lamassoure’s report is a valuable source for students and researchers of European law and politics, as well as migrant EU citizens.

Lamassoure looks at the human side of European integration.


Ralf Grahn