No C 60/12 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 3. 91 
The essential provisions of the Regulations currently in 
force have in large measure been taken over here in an 
abridged form. The Committee wonders however why 
Done at Brussels, 18 December 1990. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The Committee welcomes the draft Regulation 
as one of the measures designed to ensure the free 
movement of products and goods—which in this case, 
is directly linked to the free movement of individuals-
—within the frontier-free Single Market, which is to be 
completed by 31 December 1992 in accordance with 
Article 8A of the EEC Treaty as amended by the Single 
Act. 
In principle, there should be no differences (in con­
ditions, etc.) between journeys undertaken within the 
single market and journeys made in a Member State. 
In the context of contacts and efforts aimed at the 
creation of a large European economic area, the Com­
munity even ought to negotiate similar arrangements 
with the countries of the European Free Trade Associ­
ation (EFTA), thereby sparing the majority of Europe's 
citizens the pettiness, which in some cases is these rules, which are in some cases very detailed, need 
to be part of a Council Regulation when they are closer 
in character to implementing provisions. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN 
quite arbitrary, frequently experienced when baggage 
is checked. Extension of the elimination of controls to 
these countries would be all the more logical in that 
relatively short journeys in Europe generally make it 
necessary to take flights or crossings which start, ter­
minate or stopover at non-Community airports or 
ports. 
1.2. This proposal is particularly welcome in that it 
is more likely than anything else to awaken Community 
citizens to the advantages of a large frontier-free 
market. 
2. General comments 
2.1. Even within the internal market, however, air­
ports and seaports stand apart as either may constitute, Opinion on die proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) concerning the elimination of 
controls and formalities applicable to the cabin and checked baggage of passengers taking 
an intra-Community flight and the baggage of passengers malting an intra-Community sea 
crossing 
(91/C 60/04) 
On 6 September 1990, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 100A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 5 December 1990. The 
Rapporteur was Mr Giacomelli. 
At its 282nd plenary session (meeting of 18 December 1990), the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
8. 3. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 60/13 
at the same time, an external frontier and an internal 
border. 
Whilst the rail link between the UK and the Continent 
established by the Channel Tunnel will be regarded as 
a land route which is not covered by this draft Regu­
lation, it should still be suject to the principles laid 
down therein. 
2.2. In accordance with the principle outlined above, 
free movement should henceforth entail the elimination 
of controls on the cabin and checked baggage of passen­
gers taking an intra-Community flight and the baggage 
of passengers making an intra-Community sea crossing. 
2.3. In the absence of specific information, this rule 
is assumed to apply to all passengers, regardless of 
whether they are EC nationals. Nor is any distinction 
made between Community residents and non-residents. 
The proposed measures apply exclusively to baggage, 
the criterion for the elimination of controls being the 
route taken, namely a direct flight or sea crossing 
between two airports or seaports in the Community, 
with the possibility of a stopover at a further Com­
munity airport or seaport. These arrangements do not 
apply to flights or sea crossing which start, terminate 
or stopover at an airport or seaport in one or more 
non-Community countries, even if they involve a Com­
munity leg. Nor do they cover the baggage of pleasure-
craft users who are free to select their own itinerary. 
2.4. The elimination of controls and formalities in 
the instances covered by the draft Regulation must not 
prejudice the safety checks applicable to air and sea 
transport. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. Article 1 
The Committee fully endorses the draft Regulation, the 
first Article of which exempts the cabin and checked 
baggage of passengers taking an intra-Community 
flight or making an intra-Community sea crossing from 
controls or formalities; this requirement is in conform­
ity with the second paragraph of Article 8A of the 
Treaty, which states that: 
'The internal market shall comprise an area without 
internal frontiers in which the free movement of 
goods, persons and capital is ensured in accordance 
with the provisions of this Treaty.' 
The Committee unreservedly endorses this principle 
and accepts that, for obvious reasons, the elimination of controls at internal Community frontiers in the stated 
cases must be without prejudice to essential safety 
checks. 
3.2. Article 3 
This article lists the derogations from the provisions of 
Article 1. In so doing, it implies that, in the case of 
flights involving legs between two Community airports 
which commence outside the Community or have as 
their final destination a non-Community airport, depar­
ture and arrival controls must always be conducted at 
the first and last Community airport concerned. The 
Committee considers that the rule is entirely justified on 
grounds of technical practicability. Other approaches 
outlined in the explanatory memorandum which may 
more closely observe the principle laid down in Article 1 
would lead to significant delays in air traffic and defi­
nitely have less acceptable economic consequences for 
the goals of the internal market than the proposed 
derogations. 
Nevertheless, the Committee considers it essential to 
regulate expressly all the cases not covered by Article 1 
(e.g. the continuation of a flight within the customs 
territory of the Community in the same aircraft when, 
pursuant to Article 2, 'flight' means the movement of 
an aircraft from one airport to another without stop­
over). The simple statement in Article 3 that the Regu­
lation does not apply in certain cases is not sufficient 
for a correct interpretation of the text. 
3.3. Article 4 
The comments on Article 3 also apply to this Article 
insofar as they concern conformity with the principles 
of the Single Market. 
3.4. Article 5 
This Article assigns responsibility for the application 
of Articles 6 and 7 to die committee on Community 
transit set up by Article 42 of Council Regulation (EEC) 
No 2726/90 of 17 September 1990 on Community tran­
sit. This committee, which is made up of representatives 
of the Member States, is chaired by a Commission 
representative. 
3.5. Article 6 
The committee on Community transit can examine 
any questions concerning the application of the draft 
Regulation. 
No C 60/14 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 3. 91 
3.6. Article 7 
This Article requires the Commission to adopt the 
provisions necessary for the application of the Regu­
lation after consulting the committee. It also states that 
the Commission must take 'the utmost account' of the 
Opinions delivered by the committee. 
This implies that the transit committee, and hence the 
Member States, have no more than an advisory function 
as regards the definition of implementing provisions. 
If, however, it transpired that the provisions governing 
the implementation of Community legislation could 
affect administrative and organizational structures in 
the Member States which remain under national con­
trol, it would seem desirable for the Member States to 
acquire the right of active participation in addition to 
their advisory responsibilities. 
4. Appendix: Further remarks 
The Committee would also take the present oppor­
tunity to highlight the problem of baggage registered 
Done at Brussels, 18 December 1990. for shipment by sea, air or rail which is subject both 
to intermediate reloading and separation from its owner 
during transport. 
In the absence of international rules requiring, for 
example, precise, standarized labelling, it is not unusual 
for such baggage to escape customs control during 
transshipment. Where the latter takes place on a ship, 
aircraft or train travelling within the territory of the 
Community, it will benefit from the transport con­
ditions applicable in the internal market. 
The Committee therefore calls on the competent autho­
rities, and in particular the Customs Cooperation 
Council, to examine the question of 'baggage/owner 
separation' with a view to introducing specific regis­
tration and labelling requirements for this type of bag­
gage which will oblige successive carriers to abide by 
customs formalities and controls. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN