ARCHIVESHISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(75)322
Vol.1975/0114

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement(CEE,Euratom)n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernantl'ouvertureaupublicdesarchiveshistoriquesdelaCommunauté économique
européenneetdelaCommunautéeuropéennedel'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement(CE,Euratom)n°1700/2003du22septembre2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003,p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiésconformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
InaccordancewithCouncilRegulation(EEC,Euratom)No354/83of1February1983
concerningtheopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropeanEconomic
CommunityandtheEuropeanAtomicEnergyCommunity(OJL43,15.2.1983,p.1),as
amendedbyRegulation(EC,Euratom)No1700/2003of22September2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003,p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary,classifieddocumentsinthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformitywithArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung(EWG,Euratom)Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar1983überdieFreigabederhistorischen ArchivederEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung(EG,Euratom)Nr.1700/2003vom22.September2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003,S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeitzugänglich.Soweit
erforderlich,wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenanntenVerordnungfreigegeben.

C0MMISSI0IOPTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(75)322final
Brussels.2July1975
IMPLEMENTATION
ofpoint10ofthefinalcommuniqueissuedattheEuropeanSummit
heldinParison9and10December1974concerningaPASSPORTUNION
COM(75)322final

COMMISSION
OPTHE Brussels ,3July 1975
EUROPEEN COMMUNITIES
Vice-President
Sir ,
The final communique issued attheEuropean Summit held inParis
on9and10December 1974 states atpoint 10that "aworking party will
"besetuptostudy thepossibility ofestablishing aPassport Union and ,
inanticipation ofthis ,theintroduction ofauniform passport .If
possible ,this draft should "besubmitted totheGovernments oftheMember
States before 31December 1976 .Itwill ,inparticular ,provide for
stage -by-stage harmonization oflegislation affecting aliens andforthe
abolition ofpassport control within theCommunity ".
Itwasagreed with theMember States that theCommission would consider
theproblems which might beraised bythesetting upofaPassport Union
between theMember States (meeting ofCoreper on24April 1974 )•
TheCommission ,having examined thescope ofthis statement ,has
reached thefollowing twoconclusions :
ThePassport Union isseen asaproject involving twoimmediate and
twolonger term objectives .Thefirst immediate objective isthe
creation ofauniform passport tobeissued byeach Member State to
itsnationals inplace ofthepassports ofvarying appearance
currently issued ,andwhich would symbolize adefinite connection with
theCommunities ;this could lead tonegotiations with non-member
countries tosecure equality oftreatment forallholders oftheuniform
passport ,irrespective oftheir nationality .Thesecond immediate
objective ofthePassport Union istheabolition ofidentity checks at
Community internal frontiers ,irrespective ofwhether these arecarried
out onnationals ofthe Member States orofnon-member countries .This
would however necessitate reorganization ofthechecks atexternal
frontiers oftheCommunity tobecarried outbyeach Member State on
behalf ofallothers ,andthis could beastarting point forthe
H.E. MrMario Rumor
Président ofthe Council
oftheEuropean Comnrunities
170 ,ruedelaLoi
Brussels

development ofaoomon appro aohonthepart ofMember States inthat they
would accord equality oftreatment tonationals ofallnon-member countries .
Itwill befortheworking party toexamine whether theproposed concept of
aPassport Union canbeputinto effect ,andifso,tolaydown theconditions
andtimetable forit.Itshould ,however ,prove possible toachieve thetwo
abovementioned immediate objectives within ashort time ,inspite ofcertain
difficult problems .
Please find attached ananalysis ofthetext ofpoint 10andthemain problems
which might beraised byitsimplementation ,followed byBOM considerations
regarding thecomposition oftheworking party which will beinstructed to
deal with the matter .
TheCouncil should decide onthecomposition ofthis working party which
would comprise senior officials from theMember States .
Inview ofthemany connections between thePassport Union andfree movement
ofpersons within theCommunities andthefact that theCommission hasa
central "role intheorganization ofthis free movement ,itwould bebest if
theCommission provided theChairman andthesecretariat oftheworking
party .
Tours faithfolly ,
CHRISTOFHER SOAMES
FOR THE COMMISSION
Enc .COM(75)322 final

ReportattachedtotheCommission'slettertotheCouncil
ontheimplementation ofpoint10ofthefinalcommunique
issuedattheEuropeanSummitheldinParison9and10December1974
1.Scopeofreport
Thisreportexpandsinturnonthethreemainfactorswhichseemtogovern
theimplementation ofpoint10*
Thesefactorsaresetoutbelowtinderthefollowingheadings:
Significance ofthePassportUnion;
Mainproblemsraisedbytheestablishment ofaPassportUnionwhichwill
havetobestudiedbytheworkingparty:
Compositionoftheworkingparty.

2.SIGNIFICANCE OP1HE PASSPORT UNION
2.1 Introduction
Theconoept "Passport Union "isanew one .Noscheme exists which bears
this name *Hieonly kno'vn measures towards creating unions embracing
several countries forthepurpose ofcarrying outcontrols ofpersons have
been theestablishment offree movement zones entailing abandonment of
identity checks atinternal frontier 'sandthetransfer ofsuch checks to
external frontiers *.Neither does "Passport Union "exist asatheoretical
concept .
However ,theexpression "Passport Union "istosome extent evocative and
calls tomind byaprocess ofassociation ofideas theconcept ofCustoms
Union .Establishing aPassport Union would provide arrangements in
respect ofindividuals similar tothose provided byaCustoms Union in
respect ofgoods ,i.e. free movement within theUnion together with
transfer ofcontrols tothe external frontiers oftheUnion and
confirmation ofitasanentity inrelation tonon-member countries inthe
form ofjoint action vis -a-vissuch countries (common foreign policy ).
Even though "Passport Union "isnotatime-honoured expression theword
"passport "isfamiliar toeveryone .Itisadocument issued byanational
administrative body tonationals ofthecountry concerned ,attesting to
their identity vis-i-visforeign authorities .Apassport establishes the
existence ofaconnection between alegal person governed bypublic
international lawandanatural person .Inthefirst place ,this connection
isaffirmed erga omnes bytheState issuing thepassport with regard toall
other legal persons governed bypublic international law.Secondly ,this
connection enables theholder ofthepassport torequire from theState
towhose territory hehastravelled such treatment ashasbeen agreed
between that State and the State ofwhich heisanational .
Such zones involving Member States oftheCommunity have been established
between theScandinavian countries andFinland ,between theUnited Kingdom ,
Ireland ,theChannel Islands theIsle ofMan ,andbetween thethree
Benelux countries .Acomparative description ofthese three zones is
given inAnnex 1.

-5-
Theprecedingremarkserenotsufficienttogiveaclearideaofthe
natureofthePassportUnionenvisagedintheParisCommunique.Ibiscanonly
"beobtainedfromananalysisoftheelementsregardedbyitsauthorsas
beingcentraltoaPassportUnion.AtalleventstheHeadsofGovernment,
incontemplating theestablishment ofsuchaUnion,regardedthree
measuresasessential:priorintroduction ofauniformpassport,
harmonization oflegislationaffectingaliensandabolitionofpassport
controlwithintheCommunity.Thesignificance ofthePassportUnion
maybegatheredfromthescopeandinterdependence ofthesethree
projecteddevelopments .
2.2Uniformpassport
Tounderstandthesignificance oftheuniformpassportinaPassport
Union,thepossiblenature,usesandpurposeofsuchapassportmustbe
considered.
2.2.1Theuniformpassportwill,asthefirststeptowardsaPassport
Union,beadocumentissuedbyeachMemberStatetoitsownnationals.It
cannotbeimaginedthattheMemberStateswouldinthenearfuturegrant
theCommunityauthoritytoissuepassports,andthatthisauthoritywould
berecognizedbytheinternationalcommunity^.Theuniformpassport
willthusofnecessitybeinitiallyanationalpassport
whichtheMemberStateswouldagreesheuldhavethesameappearance
soastodemonstrate ,inadditiontoaconnectionwiththecountryin
question,adefiniteconnectionwith'theCommunity.
TheCommunityinstitutions haveatpresenttherightmerelytoissue
laissez-passer totheirofficialsandservants(cf.Article7ofthe
ProtocolonthePrivilegesandImmunitiesoftheEuropeanCommunities).
Theholdersofsuchlaissez-passer maytravelfreelywithintheterritory
oftheCommunityandnon-membercountrieswhichrecognizethem
(currentlyonlySwitzerland)withoutbeingrequiredtopresentany
furtherproofofidentity.

2.2.2Asregardsitsuse,theuniformpassportisnotintendedtobea
documentservingonlythepurposeoffreemovementofnationalsofthe
MemberStateswithintheCommunity.Hiewordsusedbytheauthorsofthe
ParisCommunique showclearlythattheyhadinmindaparticularkindof
identitydocument,onespecifically intendedtobeusedabroad,even
thoughitmayplayasubsidiaryroleasanationalidentitydocument,so
thatstandardizing passportswillentailthejointcreationofanew
documentintendedtobeusedinrelationswithallnon-membercountries.
Therewould,moreover,belittlepointinintroducingauniformpassport
tobeusedasanidentitydocumentsolelyfortravelwithintheCommunity,
whichwouldbeinadditiontotheidentitycardheldbynationalsoffive
oftheMemberStatesoutofnineandwhichiscurrentlyallthatis
requiredforsuchtravel.
Ifoneofthefundamentalcharacteristics ofpassportsisthattheymaybe
usedinanyforeigncountry,thesamewouldbetrueofuniformpassports.
Butwerethesetobeintroduced,isitpossibletoimaginethatthesame
authoritywouldissuetothesamepersontwopassportshavingthe
characteristics ofdocumentsissuedatnationallevelandyetdifferingin
theirappearance?Itseemsratherthatuniformpassportsshouldreplace
immediately oratatimetobefixedthepassportsofvaryingdesign
currentlyissuedbytheMemberStatestotheirnationals,andbevalidin
thesamewayassuchpassports,notonlywithintheCommunitybutalso
vis-a-visallnon-membercountries.Inotherwordstheywouldbeusedin
thosenon-membercountrieswhichrequirepassports,
whereasintucremainingnon-member
InPranceandItaly,nationalidentitycardsaregenerallycarried,
althoughtheyareoptional.HieyarecompulsoryinGermany,Belgiumand
Luxembourg.

countriesandintheCommunity,theywould,"beused"byallnationalsof
thoseMemberStateswhichdonotissuenationalidentitycardsandbythe
nationalsofIlemberStateswhichissuesuchidentitycards,whetherthey
donotholdsuchadocumentorwhethertheyprefertouseapassport.
2.2„3Havingestablishedthatpassportsofuniformappearanceshouldbe
usedinplaceofthepassportscurrentlyissuedbyMemberStates,the
mannerofthisreplacement anditssignificance shouldnowbeexamined.
Althoughitistruethatthecreationofapassportofuniformappearance
wouldinnowayaffectagreementsconcludedbyeachMemberStatewith
non-membercountriesforthebenefitofitsnationals,andwouldleave
unaffectedthedifferencesintreatmentaccordedbysuchcountries
accordingtowhetherapersonisanationalofoneMemberStateoranother,
thefactremainsthattheintroduction ofsuchapassportwouldhavea
psychological effect,onewhichwouldemphasizethefeelingofnationals
ofthenineMemberStatesofbelongingtotheCommunity.Buttofully
appreciatethiseffect,itshouldberememberedfirstlythatforthe
nationalsoffiveMemberStates,onlynationalidentitycardsnoedbe
carriedtotraveltoanumberofnon-membercountries,andsecondlythat
thereplacementofonedocumentbyanother(inthiscase,anational
passportbyauniformpassport)willbefeltmuchmorepositivelyand
lastrnglyifaccompanied byachangeinthestatusquo,i.e.ifthe
connectionwiththeCommunityattestedtobytheuniformpassportproduces
concreteresultswithregardtothetreatmentaccordedtoitsholderby
non-mambercountries.
Oneshouldtakeintoaccountnotsimplythepsychological effectofa
uniformpassportasjustifyingitsexistencebutthatsuchapassportmight
beequallyjustifiedbythedesireofthenineMemberStatestoaffirm
vis-a-visnon-membercountriestheexistenceoftheCommunityasanentity,
andeventuallytoobtainfromeachofthemidenticaltreatmentfor

citizens oftheCommunity .Inthesame wr.y that equality oftreatment is
assured ,onthebasis oftheCommunity Treaties ,between citizens ofthe
Community intheMember State inwhich they reside ,soequality of
treatment ofCommunity citizens ,whatever their nationality ,would be
ensured bystages through thePassport Union ,when they travel toa
non-member country .Itwould certainly bedisturbing tofind that two
nationals oftwodifferent Member States ,each holding auniform passport ,
were treated differently bythesame non-member country because oftheir
nationality by,forexample ,requiring onetohave avisa andnotthe
other orwhere discrimination arose bygranting oretheright ,topursue
business activities and not the other .
(This approach would give uniform passports thestatus traditionally
associated with passports which ,inaddition toattesting toaconnection
with alegal person governed bypublic international law ,secure equal
treatment asbetween holders ofthesame kind ofpassport byother
international entities recognizing that legal person .
Thus inaddition tobringing into being apassport ofuniform appearance ,
thePassport Union would have asanobjective thetask ofacquiring for
that document thestatus normally reserved forsuch documents ,thus
involving negotiations with each non-Member State tosecure identical
treatment forallcitizens oftheCommunity .
Ifthis approach were adopted ftheuniform passport would thus have tobe
viewed assupporting rights tobenegotiated toattain identical treatment
forallnationals oftheMember States bynon-member countries andas
evidence ofthedesire oftheMember States toundertake such negotiations .

-9-
2.3AbolitionofpassportcontrolwithintheCommunity
InadditiontotheaspectofthePassportUnionconcernedwithexternal
relationsandconsistingofthecreationofauniformpassportand
possibleextensionofthatmeasure,i.e.negotiationsforidentical
treatmentofcitizensoftheCommunitybynon-membercountries,thereis
anaspectconcernedwithinternalrelationswhichinvolves,asweshall
see,theabolitionofpassportcontrolwithintheCommunity.Theactual
scopeofthismaybediscernedstagebystagebymeansofananalysis
basedongradualelimination.
2,3.1AbolitionofpassportcontrolwithintheCommunitycannotmean
abolishingallchecksonidentitydocumentsthroughouttheCommunity.All
theMemberStatesrequirealienstocarryeitherapassportoranidentity
card,andalthoughsomedonothaveasystemofidentitycardsfortheir
ownnationals,identitycheckshavetobeoarriedoutinotherways.It
isclearthattheauthorsoftheParisCommuniquedidnotenvisagethe
generalabolitionofpassportchecksonaliens.Whattheyhadinmind
mustthereforebecheckscarriedoutatfrontiersatthetimeofentryor
exitbjaliens.
TheMemberStatesmutuallyrecognizetherighttocheckthepassportsnot
onlypfaliensbutalsooftheirownnationalsandthesechecksaxecarried
outatthefrontieronexitorre-entry.
Itisthusclearthattheabolitionofpassportcontrolwithinthe
CommunitymeanstheabolitionofpassportcontrolatCommunityinternal
frontiers.

-10-
2.3.2Further,abolitionofpassportcontrolcannotconsistonlyof
abolitionofcontrolofpassportsattheinternalfrontiersofthe
Community.Itmustlogicallyextendalsotodocumentswhichreplace
passportsbyagreementbetweenStatesfsuchasnationalidentitycards.
Inordertobeinanywaybeneficial,abolitionofpassportcontrolmust
includeabolitionofchecksonalldocumentsrecognizedasvalididentity
documentsinthecontextofinternational relations.
2.3.3Moreover,abolitionofidentitychecksatinternalfrontierscan
notbeselectiveandapplyonlytonationalsoftheMemberStatesto
enablethanalonetomovefreelywithintheCommunity.Itisimpossible
todistinguishnationalsofanotherMemberStatefromthoseofa
non-membercountry.Ifidentitychecksinrespect
oftheformeraretobeabolishedtheirabolitioninrespeotof
thelattermustalsobeaccepted.
2.3.4Finally,abolitionofpassportcontrolatinternalfrontierscan
notapplyonlytoidentitydocuments,allowingchecksondocumentsba.sed
onthem,suchasentryorexitvisas,residencepermitsandworkpermits
tocontinue.Toretainchecksonthesedocumentswoulddefeattheobject
anddestroytheadvantagesofabolishingchecksonidentitydocuments.
2.3.5Tosumup,ifalltheimplications oftheabolitionofpassport
controlwithintheCommunityareconsidered,itisclearthatthisentails
onthepartofeachMemberStatea>clitioninprincipleofallformsof
controlofindividuals,whatevertheirnationality,carriedcutatthe
internalfrontiersoftheCommunitybothontheirentryintoorexitfrom

-11-
thecountryconcerned*Itshouldnotbeforgotten,however,thatfree
movementofpersonsacrossinternalfrontierscannotheattainedsolely
throughthePassportUnion.Thiscanonlyheachieved "byensuring,in
addition,thatchecksarenotmadeongoodsoroncurrencycarriedbysuch
persons,orontheirvehicles.
Moreover,aswiththe-uniformpassport,abolitionofcontrolofpersonsat
Communityinternalfrontiersprovidesscopeforfurtheraction.Inthe
sajnewaythattheintroduction ofuniformpassportscouldleadto
negotiations forequalityoftreatmentofnationalsoftheMemberStates
bynon-membercountries,abolitionofcontrolsofpersonscould,byreason
oftheirtransfertoexternalfrontiers,triggeroffdevelopments towards
equalityoftreatmentofthenationalsofnon-membercountriesbythe
MemberStatesonthelinesofaprocessexemplified bytheConvention on
thetransferofcontrolofpersonstotheexternalfrontiersofBenelux
signedon11AprilI960(cf#AnnezI).Asimilardevelopmentwhich,when
complete,resultedinnationalsofonenon-membercountryholdingthe
samekindofpassportnolongerbeingtreateddifferently bythenine
MemberStatesbecauseoftheirnationality wouldaccordwiththeconcept
ofaPassportUnionwhichwentfurtherthanbeingsimplyafreemovement
zone.
2.4Harmonization oflegislationaffectingaliens
Introduction ofauniformpassportandabolitionofcontrolsofpersonsat
internalfrontiersaxeobjectivesbeyondwhichothers,moreambitious,
maybediscerned.However,harmonization oflegislationaffectingaliens,
likeallharmonization ofnationallaws,cannotconstituteanobjective.
Inthepresentcase,itwouldberathertheconsequenceofabolishing
controlofpersonsatinternalfrontiers.Theabolitionofsuchcontrol

entailsthetransferofcontrolstoexternalfrontiers .tosomedegree,
implyingharmonization ofthenationallegislationconcerned.Moreover,
ifequalityoftreatmentofnationalsoftheMemberStatesbynon-member
countrieswerenegotiatedonthebasisoftheuniformpassport,these
countrieswouldbeboundtorequestinexchangeasimilardegreeof
equaltreatmentoftheirnationalsbytheMemberStateswhichwouldlead
inthiswaytoharmonization ofthenationallawsconcerned.Inboth
caseshowever,therelevantpartoxeachMemberState'slegislation
affectingaliensiethatwhichappliestonationalsofnon-membercountries
andnotthatwhichappliestonationalsoftheotherMemberStates,which
hasalreadybeenconsiderably amendedinimplementation oftheEECTreaty,
andinparticularArtioles48,52,56and59thereof.
Ifitistruethatharmonization oflegislationisaquestionofnieons
ratherthanends,itdoesnotseeninecessary,forthepurposeofdefining
thepossiblenatureofthePassportUnion,tofurtheranalyseherethe
purposeandmethodsofharmonizinglegislationaffectingaliens.
AnnexIIprovidesadditionalinformation onthenationallawsgoverning
aliensandabouttheharmonization ofthoselaw3asaconsequence of
attainingtheobjectivesofthePassportUnion.
2.5Conclusion
Ithasprovedpossible ,todefinethePassportUniononthebasisofthe
constituentfactorsanalysedabove.
ThesefactorshaveshownthePassportUnionto"beaprojectaimedat
confirmingtheCommunityasanentityvis-a-vistherestoftheworld
andcapableofrevivingthefeelingofoitizensoftheCommunityof
belongingtothatentity.

-13-
Theform this project will take consists firstly inreplacing national
passports ofvarying appearance with auniform national passport ,and
perhaps inaddition inseeking tosecure identical treatment ofcitizens
oftheCommunity "byevery non-member country »Inthis way ,theimpact
ofsuch identical treatment which would make nationals ofthe Member
States working ortravelling outside theCommunity more aware oftheir
connection with theCommunity would "beadded tothepsychological effect
ofhaving apassport ofuniform appearance .
Theproject also involves abolition ofcontrol ofpersons atCommunity
internal frontiers andsome degree oftransfer ofsuch control toexternal
frontiers ,which could lead touniform treatment ofnationals ofnon-member
countries byalltheMember States .
This second aspect ofthePassport Union will have aconsiderable impact
onpublic opinion ,since itaffects allcitizens oftheCommunity
travelling within theCommunity andallnationals ofnon-member countries
travelling toanyoftheMember States .
Theharmonization oflegislation affecting aliens referred toinpoint 10
oftheParis Communique asthethird element central tothePassport
Union isinfact only thecorollary oftheother two.Itisclear that
thegreater theextent towhich theMember States agree toafford equality
oftreatment tonationals ofnon-member countries ,whether itbetoensure
that amore efficient check iskept onsuch aliens ortosecure equal
treatment onthepart ofnon-member countries inexchange ,themore
extensive and fundamental will bethe harmonization ofnational laws
affecting aliens .

-14-
3.MAIN PROBLEMS RAISED BY1HEESTABLISHMENT OFAPASSPORT UNION WHICH
WILL HAVE TOBESTUDIED BYTHEWORKING PART ?
Itsremit being tostudy thepossibility ofestablishing aPassport Union ,
theWorking party will obviously have todefine theelements central to
such aproject .Ifitwere toarrive attheconcept ofaPassport Union
described above itwould have to3tjdytheconditions andtime limits in
which this could bebrought into being .Inthis respect ,itswork could
beorganized under thefollowing four headings :
uniform passport :
abolition ofcontrol ofpersons atinternal frontiers intheCommunity ;
equality oftreatment ofnationals ofMember States bythird ,countries ;
legal implementation ofthePassport Union .
3.1 Uniforrapassport
3»1»1 Itshould notbeparticularly problematic todecide onthe
appearance ,content andholders oftheuniform passport provided that
there isagreement that this passport ,although essentially national ,will
demonstrate ,inaddition toanational connection ,aooqineotion with the
European Communities andwill replace existing national passports whose
appearance varies .Itshould however bepointed outthat thedetailed
arrangements forreplacing existing national passports byauniform
passport could raise sane problems cfapolitical nature *Ms could for
example bethecase with theBritish passport issued bytheUnited Kingdom
notonly toBritish citizens with thsright ofabode butalso toother
British subjects whoarecitizens ofnon-member countries .
3*1*2 Thetime required before thefirst uniform passports areissued
could berelatively short ,firstly because theproblems involved do
notsees unduly nuaerous ,andsecondly ,because this isinprinciple
aproject separate fro«theabolition ofcontrol ofpersons atinternal
frontiers .

-15-
3.2 Abolition ofcontrols ofperson *at
Itisatpresent impossible fortheCommission todraw upacomplete list
ofthemain problems raised ,bytheabolition of•sxtrel ofpersons mi
internal frontiers andtoputforward possible solutions toeach ofthem .
This isbecause oflack ofinformation about thelegislation ineach
Member State governing frontier cuccks onpersons entering orleaving ,
whether nationals oraliens .PurJhjnnore ,there isuncertainty about the
conditions under which such legislation isapplied inpractice .Inone
andthesame Member State legislation andpractice mayeven vary according
tothe frontier inquestion .
IniheBe circumstances ,theonly thing that canbedone atpresent isto
draw upawork programme .Five guidelines aresuggested under which the
problems raised bytheabolition ofchecks atinternal frontiers maybe
listed ,then dealt with .
3.2.1 Once theinternal and external frontiers intheCommunities are
determined ,itwill beneoessajy todraw upalist ofthecontrols ofpersons
carried outatpresent byeach Member State atinternal frontiers ,and
toestablish theextent towhich thedisappearance ofsuch controls would
affect application oftherelevant substantive provisions .
Indoing so,theimportance offrontier checks should notbeoverestimated .
Asregards aliens whoarenationals ofanother Member State ,these checks
areinfact toalarge extent superfluous ,butaremaintained because it
isimpossible todistinguish such persons from nationals ofnon-member
countries onthebasis ofphysical appearanoe *Moreover ,checks upon
entry are ,generally speaking ,apriori checks thedisappearance ofwhich

-16-
would affect neither thesystem ofaposteriori checks carried outwithin
national territory orthepenalties applied when offenoes areestablished .
3.2.2 Once cases have "been established where abolition ofchecks at
internal frontiers would lead toaconsiderable reduction inthe
effectiveness oftherelevant substantive provisions ,thenecessary
corrective measures would have tobefound .These could consist in:
adapting therelevant national rules andtheir application solely by
theMember State inquestion ,forexample byincreasing thenumber of
random checks carried outaposteriori andtheseverity ofthepenalties
imposed forestablished offences ,or
establishing close cooperation between thesupervisory authorities in
theMember States ,whowould provide oneanother with theassistance
necessary toensure that thesubstantive provisions adopted
independently byeach Member State were respected ,or
amending thenational substantive provisions soastoharmonize or
even standardize them ,possibly granting authority tojoint bodies .
Three matters which would call forcommon action bytheMember States
come tomind straight away .
Thefirst isthesystem ofcard checks onpersons entering andleaving .Only
oertain Member States ,namely Ireland andtheUnited Kingdom ,
have setupasystem whereby cards areissued topersons upon entry
andcollected ondeparture ,thus enabling thelength ofstay intheir
territory tobechecked .Thia 'p:x>blem would therefore have tobe
examine ».
Thesecond isthevisa aspect .
Visa requirements ,which aredifferent forimmigration than forholiday
andbusiness trips ,arenotthesame inthenine Member States .So
long asthese differences arenotintegrated into acommon foreign
policy ,they will remain anobstacle totheestablishment ofasingle ,
lasting visa policy within theCommunity .

-17-
WithinBeneluxtheproblemisresolvedbyaoomonpolicywhileinthe
NordicUnionitisachieved "throughasimpleformofadministrative
cooperation.TherearenoprovisionsonthissubjectintheUnderstanding
"butinfacttherearefewdifferencesbetweenthevisarequirementsof
IrelandandtheUnitedKingdom.
Thethirdisthequestionofdeportation.
Heretherearedifferences fromcountrytocountryfoundnotonlyin
writtenrules(objectivegroundsfordeportation),butalsoinconcepts
andpolicies.Allcountriesaimtoupholdlawandorderandpublic
securityandreservetherighttodeportaliensonthesegrounds,but
theseconceptsaredifferentlyconstituted fromonecountrytoanother
andtheMenberStatesretainuntrammeled powertodefinethem.These
constituentpartsarenotharaonizedinrespectofaliensfromanother
MemberStateevenintheCommunitycontext.Ithasnotbeenpossibleto
domorethantolaydowncertainlimits(forexample,prohibitionon
relyingoneconomioreasonsorpreviousconvictions )andtostrengthen
safeguardsthroughthecourts.Moreover,thestrictnesswithwhich
deportation measuresareappliedvariesgreatlyfromoneMemberStateto
another;thedifferencesinattitudearelargelydependentonthe
economic,socialandpoliticalfactorsprevailingatthetime.To
resolvethisproblemBeneluxandtheNordicUnionmakecasesfor
deportationsubjecttoaconsultation procedure.TheUnderstanding
makesnoprovisionforsuchcases.

-18-
3.2.3Oncetheworkingpartyhasestablished,inparticularby
examiningtheabovethreequestions,whichchecksshould "becarriedout
"byeachMemberStateonbehalfofallothersattheexternalfrontiers,
itshouldthenconsidertowhatextentsuchchecksarecompatiblewith
theagreementsenteredintobytheMemberStateswithaparticular
non-membercountryanddesignedtosimplifyorabolishcontrolsofp*raoni.
Wheresuchchecksarefoundtobeincompatible therearethreepossible
solutions:theMemberStatepartytosuchemagreementrepudiatesit,
theagreementisextendedtoallMemberStatesoftheCommunity,or
lastlytheagreementisamendedinsuchatraythattheMemberState
partytoitisabletoprovidetheotherMemberStateswithadequate
guaranteesregardingthecontrolofpersonsitcarriesoutonbehalfofall.
3.2.4Iheworkingpartywouldalsohavetoestablish,byweighingthe
advantagesanddisadvantages ,whetherchecksshouldbeabolishedatall
theinternalfrontiersoftheCommunities orwhetherthisshouldnot
applytothenon-EuropeanterritoriesofMemberStates,
3*2.5Finally,theworkingpartywillhavetoundertakeexaminationof
allcheckscarriedoutatinternalfrontierswhichareliabletoimpede
thefreemovementoftravellers,soastoverifythatthevarioussectoral
measuresalreadytakenorintheprocessofbeingtakeninfactresult
incomplétéfreedamofmovement»

-19-
Inthisrespect,theworkingpartywouldhavetoextenditsinvestigations
tocheckscarriedoutnotonlyonpersonathemselves(identity,rightof
entry,etc.)butalso,forexample,onarticlesorcurrencycarried.
Thesearethelinesalongwhichtheworkingpartycouldstructureits
workontheabolitionofcontrolsanpersons.Itwillmoreoverfind
aspectstoconsiderinthevariousprojectsandactualdevelopments
referredtoinAnnexesIandIII.
Intheabsenceofpreciseinformation aboutthemainproblemstobe
resolved,itisdifficulttoestimatethetimewithinwhichabolition
ofcontrolofpersonscouldbecomeeffectiveattheinternalfrontiersof
theCommunity.Howeverlongthismaybeitwillbeconsiderably
lengthenedifabolitionofcontrolsislinkedtotheintroduction ofan
identitycardcumpassportasdescribedabove.
3.3EqualtreatmentofnationalsofMemberStatesbynon-membercountries
Achievementofthisobjective,ifadoptedbytheworkingparty,isin
essenceindependentoftheabolitionofcontrolofpersonsatinternal
frontiers.Itimplieslongtermactionwhichwouldcommenceafterthe
introduction oftheuniformpassportandwhichwouldleadtomajor
changesfortheCommunities.
3.3.1AsisshownbytheexampleofBenelux,abolitionofcontrolof
personsatinternalfrontierscanleadtothe-gradualdevelopmentofa
commonvisapolicyvis-a-visnon-membercountries.Ifthisisdone,
bygrantingreciprocalrights,theMemberStateswouldbeinducedto
negotiatewithsuchcountrieswithaviewtoabolishingvisasforall
theirnationals.

-20-
3.3.2 Although onthis particular point regarding visas acertain
degree ofequality oftreatment ofnationals ofMember States by
non-member countries canbeachieved through developments resulting from
theabolition ofchecks atinternal frontier 's,nevertheless such
equality oftreatment asawhole isanobjective that canbeachieved
through aseparate programme that would constitute oneofthepossible
developments opened upbythecreation oftheuniform passport .This
programme would probably have tobespread over anumber ofyears
since equal treatment ofnationals ofallMember States byellnon-member
countries implies thereplacement ofexisting bilateral agreements by
joint agreements according toaprocess which could besimilar tothat
bywhich thecommon commercial policy isgradually being introduced at
present .Moreover ,through thegrant ofreciprocal rights ,these
renegotiations would raise directly theproblem ofMember States according
equality oftreatment tonationals ofnon-member countries thus supplementing the
initial results obtained inthis oonnection bymeans ofjoint action
following abolition ofchecks attheinternal frontiers oftheConnmmity .
3.3.3 Itisclear that such aprocess would gradually give non-member countries
thefeeling -that here were thebeginning ofCommunity citizenship .Forthis
reason ,iftheworking party were tocarry itsproposals regarding
equality oftreatment ofnationals ofMember States bynon-member
countries thus far ,itwould have totake into account ,firstly ,the
grant ofspecial rights envisaged inpoint 11oftheParis Communique
which bygranting political rights aims toconfirm onaninternal basis
theexistence ofCommunity citizenship ,andsecondly ,theEuropean
Union proposals which arebeing drawn upatpresent .

-21-
3.4 Legal implementation ofthePassport Union
Iftheworking party concludesthat aPassport Union isfeasible and
establishes insufficient detail theconditions anddetailed arrangements
tinder which itcould "be "brought into being ,itwill then have toconsider
howtherelevant agreements should helegally formulated .
Since theCommunity Treaties contain noprovisions giving animmediate
power toactwith regard topolitical rights ,even under Article 235of
theEECTreaty ,thelegal instrument tobeemployed would have tobean
adhocact ,which could beanewtreaty governed byinternational law
or-ifnecessary -anamendment totheEECTreaty pursuant toArticle 236
byaddition ofthenecessary provisions ,e.g. ,intheform ofaProtocol .
Ifthesolution ofanewtreaty governed byinternational lawwere
adopted ,anumber ofquestions would arise such aswhether ornotsuch a
convention would have tocontain self-executing provisions ,whether or
notprovision should bemade foruniform interpretation ofit,eto.
3.5 Conclusions
Theproblems raised bytheprojected developments specifically referred
toinpoint 10forwhich ,such astheendeavour tosecure identical
treatment ofCommunity nationals byevery non-member country andits
corollary through thegrant ofreciprocal rights ,i.e. ,negotiations to
secure identical treatment ofnationals ofevery non-member country by
Member States ,would logically result from oneofthese projected
developments ,namely theuniform passport ,have indicated bytheir scale ,
andhaving regard topast andcurrent experience ,which oftheprojected
developments could beputinto effeot within areasonable time andwithout
toogreat difficulty .
These projected developments aretheintroduction ofapassport of
uniform appearance provided itisnottechnically sophisticated ,abolition
ofchecks atinternal frontiers and their transfer toexternal frontiers

-22-
basedontherelevantexperienceofsixMemberStatesandharmonization of
legislationaffectingaliensconfinedtomeasuresregulatingtouristand
businessvisitors.
TheobjectivesofsecuringuniformtreatmentofCommunitynationals "byevery
non-membercountryand,throughthegrantofreciprocalrightsofuniform
treatmentofnationalsofsuchcountries "bytheMemberStateswould "bemore
difficultandtakelongertoachieve.Inadditiontotheneedtoharmonize
thevisaandimmigrationpoliciesoftheMemberStates,whichis"boundup
withtheaspectofreciprocity ,non-membercountrieswouldhavetoagreeto
regardtheNineasasingleentityandEuropeancitizenship asareality.
Itmust"beacknowledged thattheCommunitydoesnotatpresenthavejurisdiction
overtherightsofpersons,withtheexceptionofeconomicandsocialrights,
andthatEuropeancitizenship,whichdoesnotexistatpresent,willtakethe
firststeptowardsbecomingarealityonlywiththeelectionoftheEuropean
Parliament onthebasisofuniversalsuffrageandtheimplementation ofpoint11
concerningspecialrights.Inanyevent,evenifthisobjectivewereadopted,
itwouldnotbesopressinglyimportantasthoseoutlinedearliersinceit
affectsonlynationalsofMemberStateswholeavetheCommunityandits
attainmentwouldbemainlyappreciated bythosefewwhospendlongperiodsin
non-member countries.

4«Composition ortheworkingparty
4«1Point10makesnomentionofthenatureofthelegalinstruments
wherebythePassportUnioncould"bebroughtintobeingortheprocedure
tobeadoptedforitsimplementation ;itmerelystatesthataworking
partywillbesetuptostudythisandtosubmitadrafttothe
Governments oftheMemberStates.
Itappearsthattherearetwopossibleapproacheswithregardtolegal
implementation ofthePassportUnion:firstlyaseparateTreaty
governedbyinternational lawandsecondlyarevisionoftheEECTreaty.
Infact,thefundamentalobjectiveofanyliberalization is,ashasbeen
shown,tosecurefreedomofmovemententirelydevoidofanycontrols
withintheCommunity,otheraspectsbeingmoreorlesscorollariesor
consequences ofthisbasicprinciple,particularly withregardtothe
transferofcontrolsonalienstotheexternalfrontiersoftheCommunity,
harmonization oflegislation andthejointconclusionofagreementswith
non-membercountriesontreatmentoftheirnationalsbytheMember
States.Hius,althoughthePassportUnionisnotessentialto
achievementoftheobjectivesoftheEECIteatyasitstandsatpresent
andsinceitisthereforenotpossibletorelyonArticle235»itremains
truethatitisanaturalextensionoftheprinciplesoffreemovement
whichconstituteoneofthefoundationsoftheCommunity.
Whichevermeansarechosen,itisclearthattheabolitionofidentity
checksattheinternalfrontiersoftheCommunities ,whichisoneof
theobjectivesofpoint10,isinkeepingwithabolitionofalltypes
ofcontrolsatsuchfrontiersandwouldfollowonlogicallyfromwhat
hasbeenachievedalreadyundertheCommunityTreatieswithregardto
freedomofmovementofpersons.

-24-
Inthese circumstances ,toensure that thework to "becarried outis
consistent with theobjectives attained under theCommunity Treaties
andtoensure their continuity theCommission proposes that itshould
itself provide thechairman oftheworking party which will "bemade up
ofpersons designated bytheMember States andwill berequired to
submit areport tothegovernment representatives meeting within the
Council tandshould also beresponsible forthesecretariat .Once the
working party hasbeen setup,theCommission will take thenecessary
steps toseethat itmeets without delay .

ANNEKI
Comparative studyofï
-theBeneluxConventionof11AprilI960
-theConvention "betweentheNordiccountriesof12July1957
-the"Understanding "betweentheUnitedKingdomandIreland
InconsideringtheabolitionofcontrolofpersonsatinternalCennnraity
frontiersitisofvaluetostudyandcomparetheConventionsalreadyin
foroewhichhavebeenconcludedbetweenorwithcertainCommunity
countriesandwhichhaveestablished zoneswithinwhichpersonsmaymove
freelywithoutbeingsubjecttofrontierchecks.
ItshouldbenotedthatsixCommunitycountriesarealreadyinvolvedin
suchfreemovementzones.
I.BeneluxConventionof11AprilI960*
1*ThemainobjectoftheConventionisto:
–abolishcontrolsofpersonsatinternalfrontiers;
-encouragetheadoptionofacommonpolicyonthecrossingofexternal
frontiers.
2.Application oftheConvention
suAjointworkingpartyhasbeensetuppursuanttotheConvention.
Itmeetsregularlyandthethreecountriesconsiderthatitoperates
verysatisfactorily .
^ConventionbetweentheKingdomofBelgium,theGrandDuchyofLuxembourg
andtheKingdomoftheNetherlands onthetransferofcontrolofpersons
totheexternalfrontiersofBeneluxterritory.11AprilI960.

ANNEX I
This working party :
-lays down fundamental rules governing thecontrol ofpersons atexternal
frontiers ;
-makes preparations forthegradual harmonization ofnational rules
governing theentry andresidenc3 ofaliens (inrelation toBenelux );
-draws tiptherelevant instructions issued "bythethree countries to
their diplomatic andconsular representatives .
b.There isinaddition anInspection Committee consisting of
representatives ofthethree countries which visits atregular intervals
thecrossing points attheexternal frontiers oftheBenelux territory .
c.Theauthorities ofeach ofthethree countries supply oneanother
with allrelevant information concerning offences committed inconnection
with theentry ,movement andresidence ofaliens .
Aliens declared undesirable inoneofthethree countries may ,atthe
request ofthat country ,bedeclared undesirable intheother two.As
arule arequest ofthis type iscomplied with .
d.Thethree countries endeavour tomaintain ajoint approach onthe
subject ininternational organizations such astheICAO (International
Civil Aviation Organization )andtheIMCO (Inter-Governmental Maritime
Consultative Organization ).
e.Since 1962 anumber ofconventions have been concluded bytheBenelux
with non-member countries concerning visas ortheir abolition .Visas
granted arevalid throughout theBenelux territory .

ANNEK I
II.Nordic Convention of12July 195 )
1.ltéobject oftheConvention isto:
-abolish control ofpersons atinternal frontier® ;
-transfer such control toexternal frontiers ,
2.Comparison between theBenelux Convention of11April I960 andthe
Nordic Convention
Points ofsimilarity
-checks arecarried outinprinciple atexternal frontiers ;
-persons admitted into theterritory ofoneofthefour Nordic States
maymove freely intheother three States (subject toexceptions );
-thefour States have given mutual undertakings toexpel persons whose
presence isconsidered undesirable byoneoftheother three States
(except where there isanexpress decision tothecontrary );
-thefour States have given mutual undertakings tosupply theother
States with allnecessary information regarding theresidence of
non-Nordic aliens *
-A"Cooperation Committee "hasbeen setupto"deal with matters of
importance tothecommon passport control zone"*
Différences
-each State hasreserved theright tocarry outchecks atintra-Nordic
frontiers where itconsiders this necessary ;
Convention between Denmark ,Finland ,Norway andSweden concerning
thewaiver ofpassport control attheintra-Nordic frontiers ,signed at
Copenhagen on12July 1957 -United Nations Treaty Series No4660 .

ANNEX I
-theCooperation Committee isanadvisory body .Itdoes notdraw up
common rules regarding frontier controls nordoes itaimtoharmonize
national rules regarding theentry andresidence ofnon-Nordio aliens ;
-thediplomatic andconsular representatives ofNordic countries donot
receive common instructions !
-there isnoprovision forcoordination between thefour Nordic countries
ininternational organizations ;
-thefour Nordic countries donothave acommon policy regarding the
issue ofvisas .
2.Aspécial feature oftheConvention
Asystem ofentry andexit cards hasbeen devised incoordination with
Rational rules regarding visas .
When aperson requiring avisa inaNordic country enters that country
anentry card iscompleted bytheauthorities inthecountry ofentry .
They retain this card .Hioclien isissued with another card which he
must beable toshow inthe event ofacheck .This card indicates the
period oftime during which hemayreside inthezone .
When thealien leaves thezone theauthorities ofthelast Nordic country
through whioh hepasses retain thesecond card ,indicate thedate ofexit
andsend ittotheauthorities ofthecountry where heontered thezone .
Ihis system allows acheck tobekept onwhether thealien isstill in
the zone orhas left it.
Ifthealien obtains aresidenoe permit foralonger period inaNordio
country other than that bywhich heentered thezone theauthorities of
thecountry issuing theextended permit notify theauthorities ofthe
latter country .

AMIEXI
Thiscards.ystemcannothoweveroperatewhereanalienrequiresanentry-
visaforonecountry,e.g.,Finland,hutnotforanother,e.g.,Denmark.
Insuchacaseacardisnotcompletedonentryintothezonevia
Denmark.HiepersonmaythereforeenterFinlandviathefrontierbetween
SwedenandFinlandwithoutundergoing 1acheck.
ThisshortcomingoftheConventioncannotberemediedsolongasthereis
nocommonpolicybetweentheNordiccountriesregardingtheissueof
visas.
III.Ifre"Understanding "betweentheUnitedKingdomandIreland
The"Understanding "concerningthefreemovementofpersonsbetweenthe
UnitedKingdomandIrelanddatesfromtheTwenties.
ItconsistsofanagreementbetweentheGovernments ofbothcountries
ofwhichthereisnoofficialtext.Itisanestablished administrative
practicefacilitatedbyacommonpastandbythesimilarityofthe
policiesofbothcountriesregardingtheentryandresidenceofaliens.
Itrelatessolelytochecksatinternalfrontiers.Officially ,therefore,
thereisnocommonvisapolicybutinpracticethepoliciesaresimilar.
Therearecertaininstanceswhereavisaisrequiredforoneofthe
countriesandnotfortheotherbutthesearerare.Moreoverthereis
nocommonpolicyregardingundesirablealiens.Itisthuspossiblefor
apersonregardedasundesirable bytheUnitedKingdomtoenterthezone
via,IrelandandtopassuncheckedintotheUnitedKingdomviathe
internalfrontierbetweenIrelandandtheUnitedKingdom.

AII-TJXI
Asystemofentryandexitcardsisappliedin"bothcountriestoall
personshavingneitherBritishnorIrishnationality .
However,thissystemislesshighlydevelopedthanthatoftheNordic
countriesinthatthee:dtcardisnotsentautomatically tothe
authoritiesofthecountryofentry.
Consequently ,apersonpossessingavisaforIrelandmayenterIreland,
thenentertheUnitedKingdomuncheckedandleavetheUnitedKingdom
forthecontinentofEuropewithouttheIrishauthorities knowing
whetherornothehasleftthefreemovementzone.TheIrishauthorities
mayinfactsucceedindiscoveringthissincetheUnitedKingdom
authorities completeanexitcardwhenthepersonleavesthefree
movementzone"buttheydonotforwarditautomatically totheIrish
authorities .
CONCLUSIONS
Itfollowsfromtheabove:
–thatitispossibletoestablishafreemovementzonebetweenanumber
ofcountrieswithoutadoptingcommonpoliciesorpracticesregarding
deportationortheissueofvisas(cf.Nordicconvention:the
"Understanding "betweentheUnitedKingdomandIrelandYi
–thatitisclearhoweverthatthelackofadegreeofcoordination of
policiesregardingvisasandthedeportation (orrefusalofentryand
residence)ofundesirablealiensmakestherelevantnationalprovisions
lesseffectivesincealiensmaymoreeasilycircumventtheminthe
absenceofchecksatnationalfrontiers.
Thisshowsthatalthoughtheabolitionofcheoksattheinternalfrontiers
ofacamniunitywouldatfirstsightseemtobeapurelyinternalmeasure,
ithasconsequencesaffectingpolicyvis–a–visnon–membercountries.
Theexazapleof3eneluxdemonstratestheseconsequencesclearly.

ANNEXII
HAKMONTZAITONOFLEGISLATION AFFECTING ALIEMS
Thepurposeofwhatfollows,afterrecallingthenatureoflegislation
affectingaliens,willbetoillustratewithexamplesitsrelationship
withtheabolitionofpassportcontrolwithintheCommunityandthe
endeavourtosecureidenticaltreatmentofCommunitynationals "by
non-membercountries,tothusshowthatthevariousaspectsofthe
PassportUnionenvisagedinpoint10oftheParisCommuniqueforma
coherentwholoandfinally,thatevenifonlytheinternalfeaturesof
thePassportUnionwerebroughtintobeingthiscouldresultin
negotiations withnon-membercountries *
Whatislegislationaffectingaliens?
EachMemberState'slegislationaffectingalienscoversallprovisions,
whetheradoptedunilaterally orbyagreement,relatingtotherightsof
aliens,whethertheybenationalsofotherIletiberStatesorofnon-member
countries.Theseprovisionsincludemeasureswhichtreatthemina
particularwayandotherswhichtreattheminthesamewayasnationals,
andtheymaybedividedintotwobroadcategories,namely:
(a)Controlofaliensandimmigration.
Hiisistheadministrative systemwherebytheentryfexpulsion,
durationofresidenceanddeportation aswellastheactivitiesof
aliensdependuponindividualdecisionstakenbygovernment
departments ongroundsofpublicorder,healthandsecurityandof
immigrationpolicy.Theprovisionsgoverningthisadministrative
systemarebasedontheexistenceofrights,proofofsuchrights
andchecksonthem.
(b)Civil,economic,socialandpoliticalrightsacknowledgedasbelonging
toaliens.
Hierearegeneralrulesdefining,inrespectofallaliensorcertain
categoriesofaliens,therightsenjoyedandexercisedbythemonce
theyareindividually authorizedtoresideorpursueanactivityin
national,territory.Onemayquote,bywayofexample,therightto

AÎÏÏJ2XII
acquireimmovableproperty,receivesocialsecurity "benefits,take
pertinprofessional ortradeassociations "byvotingor"bybeing
eligibleforelectionandtakeupcertainactivitiessuchasthose
ofdoctors,lawyersetc.
Harmonization oflegislationaffectingaliensasaresultofthe
abolitionofcontrolofpersonsattheinternalfrontiersofthe
Conmunity
AbolishingpassportcontrolwithintheCommunitywouldmeanthatsuch
controlwouldbetransferred totheexternalfrontiersandthateaoh
MemberStatewouldcarrythisoutonbehalfofalltheothersunlessthe
MemberStatesabandonedallaprioricontrolwhichseemsunthinkable#
AprioricontrolbyaMemberStateonbehalfofallimpliesinturna
minimumdegreeofharmonization ofnationallawsgoverningnationals
ofnon-membercountries.
Thetypeoflegislationliabletobeaffectedbysuchharmonization
followingtheabolitionofcontrolofpersonsattheinternalfrontiers
oftheCommunityisthatdesoribedaboveundercontrolofaliensand
immigration.
Itispossibletoconceiveofanumberofsituationsinwhichsuch
harmonization wouldprobablybenecessary.Forexample,ifsomeMember
Stateswishtocontinuetorequireanentryvisa,evenfortouristor
businessvisits,fromnationalsofaparticularnon-membercountrywhile
othershavewaivedthisrequirement,thefactthatthelatterallow
thosenationalstoentertheirterritorywithoutavisawouldmakeit
verydifficultfortheformersinceabolitionofcontrolsatinternal
frontierswouldmeanthatthosenationalscouldenterwithoutavisa
aStatewhichrequiredthemtohaveavisa.Inthisway,nationallaws
governingvisaswouldlosemuohoftheireffectivenessiftheyaretoo
dissimilar.

-3-
AUNEX II
Inthesame way ,although some Member States arestrict about entry
into their territory andhave very elaborate exit andentry control
procedures designed toensure inparticular that anauthorized period
ofresidence hasnotbeen exceeded others with less strict entry
controls may ontheother hand actmore expeditiously with regard to
deportation orapply more severe penalties forillegal periods of
residence ,just asthey mayprefer asystem whereby registration is
required onarrival oronpassing through theplace orplaces of
residence intheir territory tocheck theperiod ofresidence *
Harmonization oflegislation affecting aliens asaresult ofnon-member
countries according equality oftreatment toCommunity nationals
Legal provisions affecting aliens which could beharmonized asaresult
oftheendeavour tosecure equality oftreatment ofCommunity nationals
bynon-member countries comprise both that which hasbeen described
under control ofaliens andimmigration andthebody ofcivil ,economic ,
sooial andpolitioal rights acknowledged asbelonging toaliens *
Tosummarize ,itappears that theharmonization oflegislation
affecting aliens tobeundertaken inimplementation ofpoint 10ofthe
Paris Communique should include atthevery least entry andresidence
requirements imposed ontourists andbusiness visitors ,measures for
controlling persons atexternal frontiers andapriori control ,and
expulsion ,deportation orother measures designed toprevent entry
into orunauthorized presence innational territory *Insofar as
certain ofthese rules arethesubject ofconventions thslatter will
have tobere-negotiated .

AUNEX III
CURRENT PROJECTS AND EXISTING SCHEMES WHICH APPEAR TOBERELATED TO
IMPLEMENTATION OFTHE PASSPORT UNION
1.Current projects andexisting schemes connected with oneorother ofthe
objectives ofthe Paissport Union provided forintheParis Communique
include abolition ofcontrol ofpersons atfrontiers ,introduction ofa
uniform passport andharmonization oflegislation affecting aliens .
There aretwotypes ofexisting schemes relating tochecks atfrontiers :
those emanating from theCouncil ofEurope intheform ofagreements to
beratified byitsmember countries andagreements between countries to
setupamong themselves azone within which persons maymove freely .
SixMember States belong tozones within which persons maymove freely :
theBenelux countries which have setupsuch azone between themselves ,
theUnited Kingdom andIreland which form onewith theChannel Islands
andtheIsle ofMan ,andDenmark which belongs toazone comprising the
Scandinavian countries and Finland .The features which characterize the
organization ofthese various zones aredescribed inAnnex Itothis memo .
Theagreements prepared bytheCouncil ofEurope aim tosimplify
formalities atfrontiers .There arethree such agreements :onedeals
with therules governing themovement ofpersons between themember
countries oftheCouncil ofEurope ,another concerns theabolition of
visas forrefugees andthethird covers themovement ofyoung persons
travelling under ajoint passport between themember countries ofthe
Council ofEurope .Only thefirst ofthese agreements isofageneral
nature andcould therefore have some bearing ontheabolition ofpassport
control within theCommunity .However ,while itincreases thenumber of
identity documents which maybeused forinternational travel itdoes not
reduce checks onthese documents atfrontiers .
2.Theintroduction ofauniform passport calls tomind another Council
ofEurope initiative .Onthebasis ofwork carried outbythe
International Civil Aviation Organization with aview tointroducing
anelectronic identity card cumpassport theCouncil ofEurope proposes
toencourage theadoption andrecognition byitsmember countries of
such adocument which would enable wanted persons tobeidentified by
means ofasignal memorized bycomputer .

-2-ANNEX III
Starting from this premise sane Community Member States have considered
encouraging theintroduction onasimilar baBis ofacard tobeissued
toallnationals ofMember States established intheCommunity orina
non-member country andtonationals ofnon-u ember oountries established
intheCommunity which ,besides being indicativo oftheEuropean Union
incourse ofcreation ,would prove inaneasily verifiable manner each
time acheck wasmade theidentity ofitsbearer andhisCommunity
status *These identity documents would also becomputerized andwould
follow thetrend intheMember States ofhaving more refined statistical
information which canbechecked atanytime about nationals andaliens
established intheir territory .
Advocates ofthese documents regard them asbeing valuable anduseful
atintra-Coramunity level only .They would serve nopurpose other than
that oftheidentity documents already accepted asproof ofidentity
bytheIlember States .Itwould simply beaquestion therefore of
replacing such documents byauniform andupdated onewhich could be
checked particularly efficiently andquickly .
Theprojects oftheInternational Civil Aviation Organization ,the
Council ofEurope andcertain Member States areallbased onsimilar
considerations ,i.e. :considerable increase ininternational travel ,
theneed toadapt oontrols tothis newphenomenon ,recourse to
international cooperation ,"useofcomputers andconsequent need for
appropriate standardization ofidentity documents .These factors differ
from those which underlie theestablishment ofaPassport Union butthey
should nevertheless bestudied when work isundertaken with aview to
introducing apassport ofuniform appearance .
3.Theharmonization oflegislation affecting aliens inthemember
countries oftheCouncil ofEurope isbeing studied atpresent bythe
Legal Affairs Committee ofitsAssembly .Thestudy will indicate the
most pressing problems inthis field andapproaches which could be
adopted tosolve them .Itcovers legal provisions governing theentry and
short term residence ofaliens aswell asthose relating toestablishment
andthepursuit ofbusiness activities inanother member country .
TheLegal Committee isexpected topresent areport andadraft resolution
intheautumn totheCouncil ofEurope onthetechnicalities andpolitical
implications ofsuch anundertaking .