Resolution

of the European Parliament containing the comments accompanying the decision concerning discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 2002 financial year — Section IV — Court of Justice

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

having regard to the revenue and expenditure account and balance sheet for the 2002 financial year (I5-0034/2003 — C5-0088/2004),

having regard to the Annual Report of the European Court of Auditors for the 2002 financial year, together with the replies of the institutions (C5-0583/2003) [1],

having regard to the statement of assurance by the European Court of Auditors, pursuant to Article 248 of the EC Treaty, as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions (C5-0583/2003),

having regard to the Council's recommendation of 9 March 2004 (C5-0145/2004),

having regard to Article 272(10) and Article 275 of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Article 22(2) and (3) of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 [2] and Article 50 of the Financial Regulation of 25 June 2002 [3],

having regard to Rule 93a of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A5-0228/2004),

1. Notes the replies given by the Court of Justice on 17 December 2003 to the questionnaire sent by the Committee on Budgetary Control on 26 November 2003;

2. Notes that as from next year the Court of Justice, pursuant to Article 86(4) of the Financial Regulation, will forward to the European Parliament a report summarising the number and type of internal audits carried out, the recommendations made and the action taken on those recommendations;

3. Regards as appropriate the Court of Justice's measures based on the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 5/2000 [4]; notes the audit report by the company KPMG [5]; also notes the report dated 21 October 2003 on new building projects, maintenance and infrastructures generally, which the Court of Justice has forwarded to the European Parliament;

4. Notes the letter of 18 February 2004 from the Registrar to the chairman of the Committee on Budgetary Control, in which the Registrar announces a series of measures both to counter the increase which has emerged over the last few years in the average length of proceedings and to take account of enlargement; calls on the Registrar to submit a detailed progress report to the European Parliament in time for the discharge procedure for the 2003 budget;

Non-official use of official cars

5. Notes that the Court of Justice, in addition to the official journeys authorised by it or by its President, defrays the cost of the use of official cars by its Members up to a ceiling of 30000 km a year (Members of the Court of First Instance: 25000 km; President of the Court of First Instance: 30000 km);

6. Notes that the Members of the Court thus enjoy benefits in kind although no corresponding decision has been taken by the EU Council of Ministers, which is responsible for their emoluments;

7. Calls for the Court of Justice to amend its rules by 1 July 2004 to require its Members themselves to bear in full the cost of non-official use of official cars;

Increases in remuneration as a result of weightings

8. Notes that on the basis of an internal administrative ruling the Members of the Court of Justice have the possibility of benefiting from increases in remuneration by having it transferred in part to other EU Member States, and taking advantage of "weightings" in the process, rather than receiving a transfer to accounts in their country of employment, Luxembourg;

9. Points out that that decision is an internal administrative ruling by the Court of Justice and can under no circumstances be regarded as a ruling in its judicial capacity;

10. Points out furthermore that that decision by the Court of Justice's Administrative Committee was taken on 25 September 2002, but that, on a proposal by the Council, Parliament and the Council subsequently deleted a remark from the Court of Justice's 2003 preliminary draft budget (Item A-1090) which provided for weightings to be applied "by analogy" with the provisions of the Staff Regulations of officials to the Members of the Court of Justice too;

11. Notes that, in doing so, the budgetary authority made it perfectly clear that it expected an end to be put to the practice, which, since 1 January 2003, has not been authorised either by provisions in the relevant regulations on the remuneration of Members of the Institutions or by corresponding remarks in the budget;

12. Points out that the Members of the Commission no longer claim weightings and calls on the Members of the Court of Justice to follow that example;

13. Asks in this connection what progress the Court has been made in establishing a specific legal basis for the application of weightings, as insisted on by Parliament [6];

14. Is pleased that the Court of Justice adheres to the same "whistleblower's doctrine" as the Commission; notes that such a doctrine is only truly effective if staff members are aware of it; encourages the Court of Justice to ensure that this information is freely available to its staff;

15. Invites its Committee on Budgets to place part of the 2005 administrative appropriations for the Court of Justice in reserve if there is no satisfactory response to the concerns raised in this resolution over non-official car use and the system of salary weightings.

[1] OJ C 286, 28.11.2003, p. 1.

[2] OJ L 356, 31.12.1977, p. 1.

[3] OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

[4] OJ C 109, 14.4.2000, p. 1.

[5] Letter of 6 June 2003 to the chairman of the Committee on Budgetary Control.

[6] Resolution of 8 April 2003, paragraph 6 (OJ L 148, 16.6.2003, p. 46).

--------------------------------------------------