EN  
 EN EN 
 
EN 2  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 30.3.2011  
SEC(2011) 396 final 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Accompanying document to the  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO  THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE 
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC  AND SOCIAL CO MMITTEE AND THE 
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 
 
2010 Report on the Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights 
 
COM(2011) 160 final 
 
EN 3 The Charter of Fundamental Rights: 
the EU's bill of rights  INTRODUCTION  
The Charter of Fundamental Rights is the EU's bill of  rights. With the entry into force of the Lisbon 
Treaty the Charter became legally binding. It is an historic breakthrough in reinforcing a Europe of 
rights and values. The Charter brings together in one text all the 
fundamental rights protected at Un ion level, spelling them out in 
detail and making them visible and predictable. 
The Charter is not just a text setting out values and principles which can only be used in theory. The 
Charter was conceived to be an instrument that enables people to effect ively enjoy fundamental 
rights in all the situations that are governed by EU  law. It is a living instrument, which should be put 
in practice daily by the EU institutions, as well as by Member States only when they are 
implementing EU law.  
In 2010, the European Commission adopted a  Strategy to make sure the Charter is effectively 
implemented, so that people can enjoy their rights in practice1. The objective is that the EU sets an 
example to ensure that the fundamental rights pr ovided for in the Charter become reality. The 
Commission is taking action to achieve this objective: it verifies that EU laws are in compliance with 
the Charter at each stage of the legislative process – from the pr eparatory work in the Commission 
to the adoption of draft laws by the European Pa rliament and the Council, as well as when Member 
States apply them. To help do 
this, the Commission produced 
a "Fundamental Rights Check-
List" to reinforce the 
evaluation of impacts on 
fundamental rights of its 
legislative proposals. The 
Commission also aims to better 
inform citizens where to turn for assistance in cases of 
violations of fundamental 
rights. To monitor progress, 
the Commission will present an 
Annual Report on the 
application of the Charter.   
                                                 
1 Communication from the Commissi on of 19 October 2010 on the Strategy for th e effective implementation of the Charter of 
Fundamental Rights by the EU, CO M/2010/0573 final,  available at: 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0573:FIN:EN:PDF  Fundamental Rights "Check-List" 
1. Which fundamental rights are affected?  
2. Are the rights in question absolute rights (which may not be subject to 
limitations, examples being human dignity and the ban on torture)?  
3. What is the impact of the various policy options under consideration on 
fundamental rights? Is the impact beneficial (promotion of fundamental 
rights) or negative (limitat ion of fundamental rights)? 
4. Do the options have both a beneficial and a negative impact, depending 
on the fundamental rights concerned (for example, a negative impact 
on freedom of expression and beneficial one on intellectual property)? 
5. Would any limitation of fundamental rights be formulated in a clear and 
predictable manner? 
6. Would any limitation of fundamental rights: 
- be necessary to achieve an obje ctive of general interest or to 
protect the rights and freedoms of others (which)?  
- be proportionate to the desired aim? 
- preserve the essence of the fundamental rights concerned? 
 
EN 4 At EU level  Protecting fundamental rights in the EU: who does what? 
In the European Union there is a clear legal requireme nt that fundamental rights must be protected. 
This protection is guaranteed by different institutions at national level and at EU level, depending on 
whether the Charter applies. When the Charter does not apply, national constitutional systems 
guarantee the respect of fundamental rights.  
The Charter applies to all actions by EU institutions.  The role of the Commission is to ensure 
that its legislative proposals resp ect the Charter. All EU institutions (and notably the European 
Parliament and the Council) are equally responsible for respecti ng the Charter throughout the 
legislative process. The Charter applies to Member States only when they are implementing EU 
law. If a national authority (administration or cour t) violates fundamental rights set out in the 
Charter when implementing EU law, the 
Commission can take the matter to the 
Court of Justice. The Commission is not a 
judicial body or a court of appeal against the 
decisions of national or international courts. 
Nor does it, as a matter of principle, 
examine the merits of an individual case, 
except if this is relevant to carry out its task of ensuring that the Member States apply 
EU law correctly. In particular, if it detects a 
wider problem, the Commission can contact 
the national authorities to have it fixed, and 
ultimately it can take a Member State to the 
Court of Justice. The objective of these 
proceedings is to ensure that the national 
law in question - or a practice by national administrations or courts - is aligned with the requirements 
of EU law. 
When individuals or businesses con sider that an act of the EU inst itutions directly affecting them 
violates their fundamental rights, they can bring their case before the Court of Justice, which subject to certain conditions has the power to annul such act. The Court of Justice of the European Union 
The Court of Justice in Luxe mbourg is an institution of 
the European Union. It is the final authority in relation to 
the Treaties, the Charter and EU law. It makes sure that 
they are interpreted and applied in the same way across 
the Union, and that EU institutions and the Member 
States do what EU law requires of them.  
The Court of Justice has long recognised fundamental 
rights as an “integral part of the general principles of EU 
law” by referring to the constitutional traditions common 
to the Member States and to the European Convention on Human Rights.  
 
EN 5 At national level  
The role of the European 
Court of Human Rights  
The Annual Report: the track record of the Charter  National authorities must apply the Charter when they follow rules laid down in EU 
law. Judges in the Member States, under the guidance  of the Court of Justice, have the power to 
ensure that the Charter is respected by the Member States only when they ar e implementing EU law. 
Individuals may also obtain compensation or 
damages if their rights under EU law are violated. 
Where the Charter does not apply, citizens' 
fundamental rights are gu aranteed by national 
authorities according to their constitutional 
systems.  Member States have extensive national 
rules on fundamental rights, which are 
guaranteed by national ju dges and constitutional 
courts. If a situation does not relate to EU law, it is for the Member States alone to ensure that 
their obligations regardin g fundamental rights are 
respected. Accordingly, complaints need to be 
directed to the national level in the first instance. 
The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg also provides legal 
recourse of last resort for individuals who feel that their fundamental rights 
have been violated by a Member St ate - all of which have adopted the 
European Convention on Human Rights. The entry 
into force of the Lisbon Tr eaty requires the European 
Union to accede to the European Convention on 
Human Rights. When this process is completed, 
individuals who feel that their human rights have 
been violated by the EU will also be able to bring their 
case in front of the European Court of Human Rights. 
The European Court of Human Rights will therefore 
provide an external mechan ism of control, regardless 
of which authority (national or EU) has adopted an act 
which might potentially viol ate a fundamental right. 
 
  
 
This Report is an essential tool in impl ementing the rights and freedoms in 
the Charter. It aims, for the first ti me, to illustrate by examples how the 
Charter is being applied. The Report informs the pub lic on the situations in which they can rely on 
the Charter and on the role of the European Union in the field of fundamenta l rights. It identifies 
what has been done and what remains to be done for the effective application of the Charter. The 
Report is based on the actions of EU institutions and the analysis of letters from the general public 
and questions and petitions from the European Parliament. This Report covers the year 2010 and will be followed by yearly reports. In covering the full range of Charter provisions on an annual basis, 
future reports will track where progress is being made, or where new concerns are arising.  
 
 
 The European Court of Human Rights 
The Council of Europe is an international 
organisation of 47 European countries dealing with 
human rights, which has enacted the European Convention on Human Rights. It is distinct from the 
EU. All of the Member States of the EU are also 
members of the Council of Europe and bound by the 
Convention.  
The European Court of Human Rights (located in 
Strasbourg) is an international court and an organ of 
the Council of Europe, whic h rules on applications 
alleging violations of the rights set out in the 
European Convention on Human Rights.  Informing citizens on where to complain 
Individuals may lose their rights for compensation if 
they miss a deadline for bringing a case to the right 
national court or authority when enforcing their rights.   
The Commission intends to better inform people, 
jointly with national human rights institutions, 
ombudspersons and other relevant bodies, on where to 
turn to in case of a comp laint. The protection for 
fundamental rights in the EU should not become an 
inextricable maze for individuals seeking to enforce their 
rights.  
 
EN 6 
Overview of the letters and questions to the Commission on fundamental rights  
Among the letters from the general public  on 
fundamental rights issues received by the 
Commission in 2010, approximately one third 
concerned situations where the Charter could 
apply. In several cases, the Commission requested 
information from the Member States concerned or explained to the complainant the applicable EU 
rules. In other cases, the complaints should in fact 
have been addressed to the national authorities or 
to the European Court of Human Rights in 
Strasbourg. Where possible, complainants were 
redirected to other bodies for more information 
(such as national data protection authorities). 
Among the questions and petitions from the European Parliament in 2010, approximately half 
concerned issues within EU comp etence. In several ca ses, the Commission contacted the Member 
States to obtain clarifications on alleged violat ions. The replies given by the Commission explained or 
clarified the relevant policies and ongoing initiatives.   
The structure of the Report  
The structure of the Report follows the six titles of the Charter itself: Dign ity, Freedoms, Equality, 
Solidarity, Citizens’ rights and Justice. Each of th e six chapters of the Report contains the following 
information on the application of the Charter: 
• Examples  of how the EU institutions2 and, where relevant, the Member States3 have applied 
the Charter  in 2010; 
• Questions and petitions  from the European Parliament4, and letters from the general public  
received in 2010 focusing on fundamental rights issues; 
• Relevant case-law of the Court of Justice5; 
• Data gathered by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights  throughout 2010.6 
 
                                                 
2 Examples of the application of the Charter by the Commission  in the preparation of the in itiatives adopted in 2010, and 
examples of the application of the Charter in the legislativ e process during 2010 before the European Parliament and the 
Council.  
3 Examples of the application of the Charter by Member States when implementing EU law in 2010.  
4 Questions from the European Parliament received in 2010 a nd petitions submitted to the Eu ropean Parliament, for which the 
European Parliament requested in 2010 an  opinion or follow-up from the Commission.  
5 Case-law in which the Court directly quote d the Charter or referred to fundamental rights in the reasoning, published in 2010.  
6 Data resulting from surveys and data collections on funda mental rights in the EU and published in thematic reports.  
 
EN 7 1. Dignity 
 
 
  
 
 Human dignity 
Right to life 
Right to the integrity of 
the person 
Prohibition of torture 
and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 
Prohibition of slavery 
and forced labour The Commission in 2010 proposed new EU rules to combat human trafficking, a 
practice explicitly prohibited by the Charter. 
The Commission examined the impact on human dignity and other fundamental rights 
of security scanners at airports. This technology aims to enhance security on flights and the EU must make sure that rules on use of scanners protect human dignity and other fundamental rights, and the health of travellers. 
Respect for human dignity is particularly  important in the rules on common EU 
external borders. New EU rules on the in terception of migran ts at sea and rules 
governing the EU Border agency (FRONTEX) guarantee the respect of human dignity of 
all migrants.  
 
EN 8 Human dignity  
Human dignity is the basis of all fundamental rights. It guarantees the protection of human person 
from being treated as a mere object by the State or  by his fellow citizens. The rights and freedoms 
under the title Dignity, such as the right to life, and the prohibition of torture and slavery, must be 
respected so we can exercise other rights and freedoms in the Charter, for example freedom of 
expression and freedom of associatio n. None of the rights laid down  in the Charter may be used to 
harm the dignity of another person. 
In 2010, the Commission received a number of lette rs from the general public, and questions and 
petitions from the European Parliament on this titl e, which were mainly related to the situation of 
irregular immigrants at the external borders and detention. 
 
As a result, the Commission took action in several cases to ensure the respect of the Charter in 
relation to EU law. One such case  concerned the respect of human dignity at the external borders of 
the Union, following allegations of maltreatment.  
In a number of other cases brought to the attent ion of the Commission in 2010, the alleged violation 
of human dignity was not related to the implementati on of EU law, such as alleged mistreatment in 
the context of routine police checks.  
Respect for human dignity at EU external 
borders  
Non-governmental organisations alerted the 
Commission to a number of cases of alleged 
maltreatment and violation of the human dignity of 
migrants by national border guards in one Member 
State.  
Border management at the external borders of the 
so-called Schengen area is governed by EU law and the 
Commission intervened in this case.  
With the creation of the Schengen area, Member 
States abolished border controls and only maintain 
them at borders with non-Schengen Member States and non-EU countries. National border guards must 
fully respect fundamental rights, including human 
dignity, when they follow EU rules on border 
management. Respect for human dignity by the police 
within a Member State  
In one case, an individual claimed to have been 
mistreated during a routine police check on the street, 
violating his human dignity. 
Law enforcement issues su ch as routine police 
checks on the street conducted by the police are the 
responsibility of the Member States. There is no EU law 
in this area, meaning that the Charter cannot be 
invoked in this context an d that the Commission cannot 
give any follow-up to  such complaints. 
The complainant should seek redress elsewhere, 
through the national courts, for example. The courts 
then apply the constitutional principles of the Member 
State concerned. 
 
EN 9 EU action in the field of aviation securi ty aims at preventing acts of unlawful 
interference against civil aviation, such as se izure of an aircraft or transportation of 
a hazardous device. In 2010, new EU rules on aviation security came into force.7 The 
main principle of European as well as in ternational rules in this field is to keep 
dangerous items such as arms, knives or explosiv es away from aircraft. For that reason, every 
passenger, piece of luggage and cargo departing from an EU airport, or coming from a third country 
and transferring through an EU airport, must undergo controls. 
Guaranteeing the security of trav ellers includes the use of new 
technologies that can detect unsafe objects at airports. A security 
scanner  is a device intended for screening persons entering 
restricted areas such as passengers boarding an aircraft to detect 
metallic and non-metallic objects carri ed on that person , some of 
which a metal detector wo uld fail to recognise.  
In 2010, the Co mmission adopted a Communication on the use of 
security scanners at EU airports .8 The Communication recalled the 
need to ensure the respect of human dignity  and private and family 
life, the protection of personal data, the rights of the child, and 
identified that according to the technology used different health 
issues must be considered.9 The Commission took note of the 
possibility for opt-outs from the use of security scanners. The 
Communication presents the types of security scanners that are 
available on the market and are used for aviation security purposes, 
reports on their detecting capabilities and on their possible impact 
on human dignity and other fundamental rights.  
The European Union strongly opposes the death pe nalty and has consistently backed its universal 
abolition, and continues to work towards this go al. The Commission was alerted to the fact that 
companies based in EU sell certain chemicals (sodiu m thiopental) to the US, which are then used in 
judicial executions.  The Commission is considering am ending EU rules that would avoid the export of 
pharmaceuticals for use in capital punishment and aims to present formal proposals in 2011. 
    
                                                 
7 Regulation (EC) 300/2008, OJ L. 97, 09.04.2008, p.72, and its implementing legislation, in force since 29 April 2010.  
8 COM(2010) 311 final, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/tr ansport/air/security/doc/com2010 _311_security_scanners_en.pdf  
9 The Communication identified that the ca pture and processing of the image of an identified or unidentifiable person by 
security scanners in order to allow a human reviewer to perfor m the security relevant assessmen t falls under EU legislation on 
data protection. The criteria against wh ich the scanning has to be assessed ar e i) whether the measure proposed is 
appropriate to achieve the objective (detection of non-metallic items and therefore a higher secu rity level), ii) whether it do es 
not go beyond what is necessary to achieve this obje ctive and iii) whether there is  no less intrusive means. 
The Commission in the Communication paid special attention to health aspects, reflecting the Charter obligation that, in the 
definition and implementation of all the Union's policies and activities, a high le vel of human health protection shall be 
ensured.  Security scanners and respect for 
human dignity 
Some technologies of security 
scanners can reveal a detailed display of 
the human body, including possible 
medical conditions, such as prostheses 
and diapers. 
This capability may compromise 
respect for human dignity and private 
life. Displaying the details about a 
person's body and his medical conditions 
indicates treating people as objects. This 
could violate the right for respect of 
human dignity, which requires that 
people are treated as sub jects.How is human dignity respected in the 
implementation of 
security scanners?  
 
EN 10 Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment  
The Charter provides that no one shall be subjecte d to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment 
or punishment. 
This provision is particularly relevant in the contex t of implementing EU rules on border control, 
which provide common standards and procedures on controls at the external borders of the 
Schengen area10. These rules guarantee resp ect for the fundamental rights of all travellers. 
Border surveillance at the external sea borders in the Mediterranean Sea is a particularly challenging 
task. In 2010, the Commission proposed new rules11 to make border surveillance at sea  more 
effective and at the same time to guarantee th e respect of fundamental rights of migrants 
intercepted at sea. In particular, national authorit ies must inform the interc epted migrants about the 
proposed place of disembarkation, so that they can object 
being taken to countries where they could face torture. 
The needs of children, victims of trafficking, persons in 
need of urgent medical assistance or of international 
protection and other vulnerable groups must be 
observed.  
The EU borders agency (FRONTEX) plays a key role in 
coordinating the action of the Member States. In 2010, 
the Commission also proposed amendments to the rules 
governing FRONTEX12. The proposed amendments require 
that all persons participating in border control activities 
undertake training in fundamental rights, that any 
incidents during operations, including in relation to 
fundamental rights, must be reported to the national authorities and followed up, and that FRONTEX 
develops detailed guidelines on how to treat thir d-country nationals who are being returned to their 
home country (building on the best practice gu idelines already in place). For example, an 
independent monitor must be present during return  operations and report to the Commission on the 
compliance of operations with EU law. 
The Commission has continued to follow the situation on 
the ground concerning the application of EU law by the 
Member States. In 2010, a number of national courts have 
referred questions to the Court of Justice on the transfer of 
asylum seekers to Greece in the framework of the EU rules 
on determining the Member State responsible for 
examining an asylum application. The Commission 
continued discussions with Greece regarding the failure to 
properly investigate reports of violations of fundamental 
rights.  These proceedings also concern a breach of EU 
asylum legislation. The Commission is concerned about al legations of a failure to respect the right to 
effective access to a procedural system allowing an application for asylum to be made and properly 
assessed, and a number of legal provisions rela ting to the treatment of unaccompanied minor 
applicants for asylum.  
EU law concerning the return of illegally staying third-country nationals  takes full account of the 
importance of Member States respecting the funda mental rights of third-country nationals. The 
                                                 
10 The Schengen area is an area within the EU without border co ntrols. It includes the territories of the Member States that have  
decided to abolish border controls between them. External bord ers are borders between the Member States that have joined 
the Schengen area and non-Schengen Member States or third countries.  
11 Council Decision of 26 April 2010 supplementing the Schengen Borders Code as regards the surveillance of the sea external 
borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinate d by the European Agency for the Management of Operational 
Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Unio n (2010/252/EU) (proposal adopted by the 
Commission on 27 November 2009; adopted by the Council on 26 April 2010), OJ L 111, 04.05.2010, p. 20-26.  
12 Proposal for a Regulation amending Council Regulation (E C) No 2007/2004 establishing a European Agency for the 
Management of Operational Cooperation at th e External Borders of the Member States  of the European Union (FRONTEX), 24 
February 2010, COM(2010) 61  final, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0061:FIN:EN:PDF  EU rules on surveillance of sea borders 
In 2010, the EU adopted new rules on border 
surveillance at sea which enhance border 
security and guarantee the respect for 
fundamental rights of migrants intercepted at 
sea. 
For example, these rules require that national 
authorities inform migrants intercepted at sea 
about the proposed place of disembarkation, so 
they can object to being taken to countries 
where they could face torture. 
Ill-treatment of migrants at the external 
border 
Following a number of allegations of ill 
treatment of migrants at the border between 
Greece and Turkey, the Commission continued 
discussions with Greece, initiated in 2009, 
regarding the failure to fulfill its obligation to 
respect fundamental rights when implementing 
EU external border legislation. 
 
EN 11 Return Directive13 includes a number of guarantees for the respect of fundamental rights of the 
potential returnees, in particular as regards the respect for the principle of non-refoulement , which 
prohibits returning people to coun tries where they could face tortur e. The deadline for transposition 
of most of the provisions of the Directive expi red on 24 December 2010, and the Commission will 
continue to pay close attention to the transposition and application of the Directive by the Member 
States in 2011 and beyond. In 2010, the Commission provided assistance to the Member States on 
how to adapt national laws to the Return Directive while  respecting the prohibition of inhuman and 
degrading treatment and other fundamental rights , by conducting regular meetings with Member 
States. 
In 2010, the Commission received a number of le tters from the general public on the issue of 
detention . They raised concerns about poor detentio n conditions due to prison overcrowding in 
national prisons, in the light of the requirements of  the Council of Europe 'European Prison Rules'. 
Several letters complained about pre-trial detainees  staying together with convicted prisoners. To 
discuss these issues, the Commission in 2010 started preparation for a Green Paper on detention. 
Prohibition of trafficking in human beings  
Trafficking in human beings is a new form of sla very that violates human dignity. The Charter 
explicitly prohibits trafficking in  human beings. A report by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights 
estimated that a significant number of people, most ly women and children, fall victim to trafficking 
for sexual exploitation, labour exploitation, domest ic servitude, begg ing, and the removal of organs 
or other purposes.14  
In 2010, the Commission proposed new EU rules15 aiming to develop a comprehensive  approach to 
human trafficking for the purpose of sexual and labour exploitation . These rules seek to achieve 
more effective prosecution by national authorities of human traffickers across borders. They propose 
uniform definitions and common standards on sanction s, liability and jurisdiction. If this proposal is 
adopted, the Member States would have to put in place mechanisms for the early identification of 
victims, as well as for the early provision of support  to victims. Victims would also receive free legal 
counselling and legal representation. When the vict ims of trafficking are children, the proposal 
extends the protection measures to unaccompanied and separated children that are subject to 
exploitation. The new definition of trafficking only requires the recruitment or transfer and subsequent exploitation when children are involv ed, regardless whether child ren have been forced 
into exploitation. The proposal also protects child ren from the negative effects of court procedures 
by defining how to conduct interviews with child vi ctims. When adopting laws  on this issue, Member 
States must take into account the rights of de fence of those accused in  criminal procedures.  
The Commission adopted a report
16 on the implementation  in Member States of EU rules17which 
require issuing residence permits to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking . The 
objective of these rules is twofold. On the one ha nd, they protect fundamental rights of victims and 
ensure that there are measures in place to assist in  their recovery (e.g. medical services, translation, 
and attendance to special needs of minors). On the other hand, they provide concrete incentives for victims, such as the issue of the residence perm it, to cooperate in dismantling networks of 
traffickers.  
                                                 
13 Directive 2008/115 on common standard s and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country 
nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p.98.  
14 EU Agency for Fundamental Rights Report  "Child Trafficking in the EU: challenges, perspectives and good practices" (July 
2009), available at: http://www. fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachme nts/Pub_Child_Trafficking_09_en.pdf  
15 Proposal for a Directive on preventing  and combating trafficking in human bein gs, and protecting victims, repealing 
Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA, COM(2009) 136 final, available at: 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0095:FIN:EN:PDF  
16 Report from the Commission on the applicat ion of Directive 2004/81 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals 
who are victims of trafficking in human bein gs or who have been the subject of an ac tion to facilitate illegal immigration, who  
cooperate with the competent authorities, COM(2010) 493 final, available at:  
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/malmstrom/a rchive/COMM_PDF_COM_2010_0493_F_EN_RAPPORT.pdf  
17 Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims of 
trafficking in human beings or who have been subject of an ac tion to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the 
competent authorities, OJ L 261, 06.08.2004, p. 19.  
 
EN 12 2. Freedoms 
 
 
 Right to liberty and 
security 
Respect for private and 
family life 
Protection of personal 
data 
Right to marry and right 
to found a family 
Freedom of thought, 
conscience and religion 
Freedom of expression 
and information 
Freedom of assembly 
and of association 
Freedom of the arts and 
sciences 
Right to education Freedom to choose an 
occupation and right to engage in work 
Freedom to conduct a 
business 
Right to property Right to asylum Protection in the event 
of removal, expulsion or extradition
 Among the rights and freedoms under this ti tle, protection of personal data was 
the area of major interest. This was reflected in the number of questions by EU citizens and by the European Parliament. To respond to challenges such as the 
emergence of new technologies, the Commis sion set out a reform of existing EU 
rules in this area. 
The right to property was also frequently mentioned in questions from the 
European Parliament, as well as in letters  from the general public. The main issues 
were the restitution of nationalised or confiscated property by communist 
totalitarian regimes and national laws for the protection of the environment. 
Freedom of religion was brought up in questions from the European Parliament 
mainly in relation to the wearing of the burqa or veils.  
For the first time, the Court of Justice declared invalid a provision of EU law 
because it violated the Charter. The case concerns the publication of beneficiaries of EU agricultural subsidies,  a practice which the Court found to be in violation of 
the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data.
 
 
EN 13 
 
Respect for family life  
The Charter guarantees the right of everyone to resp ect for his or her private and family life. EU free 
movement rules recognise the right to family life fo r all EU citizens who move and reside in another 
Member State. EU rules on family reunification18 recognise the right to  family reunification  for third-
country nationals legally residing in the EU. 
The majority of the letters that the Commission 
received in 2010 in this area related to problems of EU citizens who wanted their family member, a third-
country national, to join  them in their own Member 
State. EU free movement rules apply to third country 
family members when EU citizens have exercised their 
right to free movement (for example, they reside in 
another Member State than their own). If problems 
concern third country family members of EU citizens 
not having exercised the right to free movement (e.g. a 
Spaniard in Spain), national law applies. 
In 2010, the Commission continued to rece ive letters and questions related to the practice of the 
German Youth Welfare office  (Jugendamt ) of asking non-German parent s to communicate with their 
children only in German under the supervision of the Jugendamt . According to the observations 
provided to the European Parliament Committee on  Petitions, the German authorities take into 
primary consideration the best interests of the ch ild and it is possible that the right to visit is 
exercised under surveillance to prot ect a child from the risk of abdu ction. The Charter only applies 
when the Member States follow rule s laid down in EU law. The spec ific cases raised did not involve 
application of EU laws and were related to subs tantive decisions of national authorities.   
The Court of Justice case Chakroun
19 concerned the interpretation of the EU Family Reunification 
Directive in light of national legislation that impo ses certain requirements on the amount of financial 
resources available to third-country nationals that  wish to obtain a residence permit for their 
spouses. At stake was furthermor e whether Dutch legislation can dr aw a distinction according to 
whether the family relationship arose before or af ter the third country national entered the territory 
of the host Member State in applying this income requirement. The Court highlighted that the 
provisions of this EU Directive have to be interprete d in the light of fundament al rights, in particular 
the respect for family life  as enshrined in the Charter. It concluded that EU law precluded such 
provisions of national legislation.  
                                                 
18 Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, OJ L 251, 3.10.2003, p. 12-18.  
19 ECJ, Case C-578/08, Chakroun , 4.3.2010.  Respect for family life of an EU citizen 
In 2010, the Commission drew the attention of the 
authorities of a Member State to the fact that their 
legislation did not guarante e the right to respect for 
family life in accordance with the case-law of the 
European Court Justice.  
The Member State amended its legislation to 
e n s u r e  t h a t  E U  c i t i z e n s ,  w h o  m o v e  t o  t h a t  M e m b e r  
State, can be joined or accompanied by their third-
country family members without requiring that family 
members had previously  resided in the EU. 
 
EN 14 How is my personal data 
protected in the application of 
new technologies?  Data protection 
The Charter guarantees the protection of personal information and Europeans take a keen interest in 
these issues. The questions and concern of citizens cover a wide range of topics, from the use of 
personal data in the application of new 
technologies to the respect of data protection 
rules by third countries. What happens to 
personal data when boarding a plane, opening a bank account, or sharing photos online? How is 
this data used and by whom?  
Developments in 
technology make our 
daily lives easier, 
assisting us in communication and protecting us 
from certain dangers. But they can also present a 
challenge from the perspective of fundamental 
rights, as the use of personal data in the 
application of new technologies has an impact on 
privacy. 
Social networking websites  (for example 
Facebook and Twitter) offer extensive 
possibilities to interact with people and share pho tos, opinions and other information online. As 
these websites also contain personal data, which must be protected, the EU Data Protection 
Authorities reminded the companies who signed the Safer Social Networking Principles of their 
obligation to respect EU data protection rules. For example, personal data on social networking 
websites cannot be shared and further processed wi thout the consent of the individuals concerned. 
Searching for information online (surfing) is part of a daily routine for many people. Even though 
many think they surf the Internet anonymously, this is 
often not the case, as they leave behind a history of 
what they have searched fo r online.  Online advertising 
companies use this valuable information. This so-called 
online behavioural advertising  means tracking users 
when they surf the Internet and building personal 
profiles over time, which are later used to provide them 
with advertising matching th eir search history. Such 
practice cannot be carried out at the expense of the 
rights of individuals to privacy and data protection. 
Search engines must inform cl early users of the fact that 
their behaviour on line may be recorded, and privacy settings must allow users to select by default the least 
intrusive option. 
 
 Dialogue with search engine operators 
In 2010 the Commission reminded three major 
companies (Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google) of the 
need to cut down to six months the period that 
they store search data before it is made 
anonymous, which would a lign their policies with 
the EU data protection legislation.  
A user's search history a lso contains a footprint 
of users' interest and personal relations and can 
therefore be considered as personal data. Google Street View 
The issue of photographi c panoramic views of 
European streets, provided by the company Google, was 
addressed several times in questions by the Members of 
the European Parliament.  
This practice may involve the processing of personal 
data, in which case EU Data protection legislation is 
applicable. 
Google must provide info rmation in advance about 
the collection of data, such as taking pictures for its 
Street View service, not only through its website, but also 
by means of information in the national, regional or local 
press or by any other appropriate means. Individuals 
must have a possibility to object to the publication of personal data relating to them by means of a simple 
procedure.
 
EN 15 A number of questions from the European Parliament were related to EU funding on research into  
new technologies in the field of security , such as the project INDECT20. This is a project through 
which the EU finances research into new method ologies and technologies, intended for police and 
other law enforcement authorities.  
The Commission has clarified that it 
remains the resp onsibility of the 
Member States to determine how to 
use these new technologies.  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
20 Intelligent information system supporting observation, searching and detection for se curity of citizens in urban environment.  Fingerprinting of school children 
The parent of a child at school complained to the Commission 
about the school taking  photographs and fingerprints of pupils for 
issuing dinner cards and for moni toring the use of the school 
library.  
Access control in schools involv es the processing of personal 
data and therefore the EU rules on data protection apply. Before 
introducing such measures, sch ool authorities should think 
carefully about whether or not they are necessary and 
proportional to achieve the inte nded aim. According to EU rules 
on data protection, personal data may only be collected in a fair 
manner, only if it is adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected.  
The Commission has asked the Member State concerned for 
more information, to establish if data protection rules were 
violated. 
 
EN 16 Personal data is sometimes transferre d to countries outside the EU. This 
can raise a number of questions because the level of protection of 
personal data outside the EU can sometimes be lower. The Commission 
maintains a list of third countries where the level of protection of 
personal data is considered to be in line with EU rules on data protection, to where personal data 
may be transferred without additional safeguards. Transfers of personal data to all other countries 
may only take place if the EU exporter provides for the adequate protections of rights, in particular 
through special contracts between the EU exporter and the foreign importer which will receive and 
process the data in comp liance with EU rules. 
In 2010, the Commission received several requests on how personal data is protected in third-
countries. The Commission has put in place a numbe r of arrangements to protect EU citizens. 
Companies from United Stat es can sign up to a set of principles called “Safe Harbor”  providing an 
adequate level of data protection. If personal data is transferred between companies belonging to 
the same multinational corporation, binding corpor ate rules must be put in place and approved by 
the national data protection auth orities involved. To facilitate and speed up the approval of these 
binding rules by national data pr otection authorities, these decisio ns are recognised automatically in 
16 of the 27 Member States21.  
Stronger data protection guarantees were taken up in the agreement between the  EU and the 
United States on the processing and transfers of data from the EU to the US for the purposes of the 
fight against terrorism (so called TFTP - Terrorist  Finance Tracking Programme). The agreement was 
concluded on 28 June 2010 and cont ains specific provisions, such as the right of access to personal 
data processed by the US Treasury, the right to rectif ication, erasure or deletion of personal data and 
the right to administrative and judicial redress. The agreement was approved by the European 
Parliament and entered into force on 1 August 2010. 
The Fundamental 
Rights Agency in its 
report identified the 
following main 
challenges for the data pr otection system in the 
EU: a) deficiencies of data protection authorities, 
b) lack of enforcement of the data protection 
systems, c) lack of righ ts awareness about data 
protection laws and authorities, d) lack of data 
protection in the former third pillar of the EU, e) 
exemptions from data protection for security and 
defence, and f) recent and ongoing technological 
developments (e.g. video surveillance).22  
The Commission will continue to monitor the 
situation in the Member States, where doubts exist about the required complete independence of 
the Data Protection authority . 
The Commission is also ensuring the co rrect application of the data prot ection rules in place. In 2010, 
the Commission dealt with fifteen infringement cases for alleged vio lation of the EU law on data 
protection23. For example, the Commission warned Finland24 that its data protection law might be 
breaking EU rules because it does not protect personal tax information  published in the media. 
Finnish data protection rules do not cover personal data that has been made public in the media. 
                                                 
21 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Cyprus, France , Germany, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the 
Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and the UK.  
22 EU Agency for Fundamental Rights Report  "Data Protection in the EU: the role of  National Data Protection Authorities", 
available at: http://www.fra. europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachme nts/Data-protection_en.pdf  
23 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliame nt and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protec tion of individuals with 
regard to the processing of personal  data and on the free movement of su ch data, OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31-50.  
24 Commission Press Release IP/10/673, 3.6.2010.  What happens to my personal 
data outside the EU - in third 
countries?  
A new strategy on data protection 
Controlling your information, having access to your 
data, being able to modify or delete it – these are 
essential rights that have to  be guaranteed in today's 
digital world.  
To address these issues, the Commission set out a 
strategy on how to protect individuals' data in all policy areas , including law enforcement, while reducing red 
tape for business and guaranteeing the free circulation of 
data within the EU. The Commission will use this strategy 
together with the results of a public consultation in order 
to propose changes to EU rules on data protection. How does the EU respond to the 
challenges in the area of data 
protection?  
 
EN 17 Under EU rules, personal data may only be colle cted for legitimate purposes, and may only be 
further processed for the specific pu rposes for which it is was collected. 
The Court of Justice  provided guidance on the interpretation of EU law25 by clarifying that Member 
States have to ensure that the authorities in charge of monitoring  the processing of personal data  
are entirely free from any extern al and internal influence . Already the mere risk of influence on the 
supervisory bodies is considered enough by the Court of Justice to hinder independent performance 
of tasks.  
Two cases before the Court of Justice concerned the issue of publishing the names and location of 
the beneficiaries of subsidies in the area of 
agriculture .26 EU rules required the publication of the 
names and location of beneficiaries of funds from the 
European Agricultural Guarantee Fund and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development on 
a website, specifying also the amounts received. 
Beneficiaries in Germany asked the Court not to 
publish the data relating to  them, claiming that it 
would breach the right to data protection. The 
national court requested the Court of Justice to 
examine the validity of the EU rules on the publication 
of the data.  The Court, referring to Articles 7 and 8 of 
the Charter, declared EU provisions on the publication of beneficiaries -natural persons- of the 
funds invalid.  It recognised that in a democratic society, taxpayers have a right to be kept informed 
of the use made of public funds, but decided that the publication naming the beneficiaries who are 
natural persons and indicating the precise amounts received by them violates their right to respect 
for their private life  and in particular to the protection of their personal data , as laid down in 
Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter. The EU institut ions had not examined whether rules limiting the 
publication of data according to the periods for which the natural persons r e c e i v e d  a i d ,  o r  t h e  
frequency or nature and amount of aid receiv ed, could have satisfied the requirement of 
transparency in providing public money to individuals.  
 
 
N.B.: The figure illustrates only the cases in which the Court directly quoted the Charter or referred to 
fundamental rights in the reasoning.  
                                                 
25 ECJ, C-518/07, Commission v. Germany, 9.3.2010.  
26 ECJ, Joined cases C-92/09 and C-93/09, Volker und Markus Schecke, Eifert , 9.10.2010.  Data protection and criminal law 
Responding to petitions related to the deletion of 
personal data from police criminal records  due to 
rehabilitation by national courts, the Commission 
explained that the EU law on data protection1 does 
not apply to processing oper ations concerning public 
security, defence, State security and the activities of 
the State in the area of criminal law. 
The supervision of the lawfulness of the 
processing of this type of  data falls within the 
competence of national data protection authorities, 
and should be raised with them. 
 
EN 18 Freedom of religion 
The Charter guarantees that everyone has the ri ght to freedom of religion, which includes the 
freedom to change religion or to  manifest it in worship, teaching, practice and observance. 
The display of religious symbols  (wearing of the burqa or veils a nd the display of crucifixes in 
schools27) was frequently raised in questions and petiti ons from the European Parliament as well as 
letters from the general public. The issue of display of religious symbols in pu blic buildings is an issue 
where Union law does not apply. The wearing of the burqa or veil raises a number of complex issues and involves various fundamental rights at the same  time, in particular the freedom of religion and 
the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds  of sex and religion. The issue falls under the scope 
of national law and Member States have adopted different approaches.  
The Commission received a question from the Euro pean Parliament regarding the wearing of the 
burqa or veil in official premises of the EU. It re plied that the entry into Commission buildings is 
subject to an identity check for security reasons. The Commission secu rity guards must be able to 
verify that the physical appearance of the person  seeking entry corresponds to the photograph on 
the identity card or other means of identification. When any person is dressed in such a way that all 
identifying characteristics, in particular the face, are hidden, a proper security check can not be 
carried out. In such cases, access to the Co mmission's buildings could be denied, following a 
proportionality assessment taking into account re ligious freedom, non-discrimination and the need 
to ensure the security of the Comm ission's officials, visitors and guests. 
Freedom of expression 
The Charter guarantees that everyone has the right to freedom 
of expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions and to 
receive and impart information and ideas without interference by 
public authority and rega rdless of frontiers.  
In 2010, a case was brought before the Court of Justice 
concerning the introduction by op erators of a system for filtering 
electronic communications to identify users who damage 
copyright or related rights.28 This case raises issues related to 
freedom of expression, as a system for filtering all electronic 
communications could have an impact on this freedom. The 
Court has, until the end of 2010, not yet delivered its ruling. 
The Commission received several letters from the general public 
and questions from the European Parliament on the issue of 
legislation (National Defence Stra tegy) adopted by the Romanian 
Supreme Defence Council (CSAT), which described the media as a security threat and vulnerability for Romania due to alleged press 
campaigns aimed at spreading false information about the 
activity of state institutions. Th e Commission replied that it is, 
within the scope of its competen ces, fully committed to ensure 
and promote the respect of freedom  of expression. In this case, 
the Member State concerned did not act in the course of 
implementation of EU law and it is for the national authorities to 
ensure that their ob ligations regarding fundamental rights are 
respected. 
The Commission was in contact wi th the Hungarian authorities 
concerning the national media law and raised concerns regarding its compatibility with the 
Audiovisual and Media Services Directive
29, and other provisions of EU law such as freedom of 
establishment, freedom to provide services and the Charter. Following the Commission's 
intervention, the Hungarian government agreed to amend the national media law using a fast track 
procedure so that it complies with the concerns raised by the Commission. 
                                                 
27 Relating to the judgement of the Euro pean Court of Human Rights of 3 Nove mber 2009, Case of Lautsi v. Italy.  
28 ECJ, Case C-70/10, Scarlet , reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’ appel de Bruxelles (Belgi um) lodged on 5.2.2010.  
29 Directive 2010/13/EU of the EP and the Council of 10 March 2010 on  the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, 
regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of  audiovisual media services (Audiovisual 
Media Services Directive), OJ L 95. 15.4.2010, p.1. The Lithuanian Law on the protection 
of minors 
In 2010, the Lithuanian authorities 
considered the adopti o n  o f  a  l a w ,  w h i c h  
provided that information on homosexuality is detrimental to minors 
and should therefore be banned. This 
proposal touched upon a number of issues 
falling within the scope of EU law, for 
example the rules on Audiovisual and 
Media Services Directive and the E-
commerce Directive. 
The Commission took the position that 
this could be contrary to the Charter, in particular the prohibition of discrimination 
and the freedom of expression. The 
Lithuanian Parliament suppressed the 
most contentious provision from the law, 
which entered into fo rce in March 2010. 
The Commission is monitoring the 
implementation of the law to ensure that 
this complies fully with the principles set 
out in the Charter, in particular that of 
freedom of expression.  
 
EN 19 Freedom to conduct a business 
The Charter recognises the freedom to conduct a business in accordance with Union law and 
national laws and practices. This Article is based on Court of Justice case-law which has recognised 
freedom to exercise an economic or commercial ac tivity and freedom of contract, and on Article 
119(1) and (3) of the TFEU, which recognises free  competition. Arguably, these rights encompass 
that the legal system gives effect to the will of th e parties. The freedom to conduct a business has to 
be taken into account in different areas of EU  policy, including IT security and civil law. 
In 2010, the Commission proposed amendments to EU rules on jurisdiction 
and the recognition and enforcement of  judgments in civil and commercial 
matters .30 The proposal gives maximum effect  to the will of the parties in 
business to business contracts by allo wing them to agree on which court 
should have jurisdiction to settle any dispute (cho ice of forum) and whether to refer the matter to 
arbitration (arbitration clause). The impact a ssessment showed that this approach would enhance 
their freedom of contract and improve their situation in terms of the freedom to conduct a business.  
In recent years, the number of attack s against information systems has risen 
steadily in Europe. New co ncerns, such as the spread  of malicious software 
creating 'botnets' - networks of infected computers that can be remotely 
controlled to stage large-scale, coordinated attacks - have emerged. To respond to these challenges, in 201 0 the Commission proposed to amend EU 
rules for protecting information systems against attacks .
31 These rules propose making a crime the 
use of tools for committing offences, making a crim e the illegal interception of information systems 
and improving the European criminal  justice and police cooperation. They also contain measures on 
storage of data and the exchange of data be tween law enforcement agencies, which are in 
compliance with EU data protection rules. The st rengthening of the penalisa tion of the production, 
sale, procurement for use, import, distribution or  otherwise making available of tools for cyber 
attacks was worded carefully in order not to crimina lise lawful behaviour, such  as the use of botnets 
by Internet security companies to  test the effectiveness of their products. Criminalisation of such 
acts would violate the freedom to conduct a business , enshrined in the Charter. 
                                                 
30 Proposal for a Regulation of the Europe an Parliament and of the Council on jurisdic tion and the recognition and enforcement 
of judgments in civil and commercial matters, COM/2010/748 final of 14.12.2010, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policie s/civil/docs/com_2010_748_en.pdf  
31 Proposal for a Directive of the European  Parliament and of the Council on attacks against information systems and repealing 
Council Framework Decision 2005/222/JHA, COM(2010) 517 final, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0517:FIN:EN:PDF  How to protect information 
systems against attacks while 
respecting the freedom to 
conduct a business?  How do EU rules on civil law 
take into account the freedom to conduct a business?  
 
EN 20 
 
Right to property 
The Charter protects the right of everyone to pr operty, which includes the right to own, use, and 
dispose of lawfully acquired possessions. Issues related 
to the right to property were featured frequently in 
petitions from the European Parliament and in letters 
from the general public.  
One issue that was frequently raised with the 
Commission was the restitution of property 
nationalised or confiscated in Member States during 
the period of communist regimes . The petitions and 
letters referred in particular to the length of the 
procedures and administrative obstacles. 
The Treaties provide that "the provisions of the Treaty 
shall in no way prejudice th e rules in Member States 
governing the system of property ownership". It is 
therefore for Member States to determine the scope 
of property restitution and the choice of the conditions 
under which they agree to restore the property rights 
of former owners that were subject to expropriation 
decisions prior to the accession to the European Union.   
The Charter guarantees the protection of intellectual 
property. 
In 2010, the Commission 
announced in the Communication Towards a Single 
Market Act
32 proposals to promote and protect 
creativity. Their aim is to lay ground for an EU patent, 
to open up access to online content  by improving the 
electronic management of copyright, and to fight 
against counterfeiting and piracy.      
                                                 
32 COM(2010) 608/final2, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriSe rv.do?uri=COM:2010:0608:REV1:EN:PDF#page=2  National laws regulating coastal areas 
Several questions (as well as letters) concerned the 
implementation of the Spanish Coastal Law. This 
legislation, aimed at protecting the coast from abusive 
construction, applies to private property, which runs 
the risk of being demolished, as it is located in areas 
regulated by the Coastal law.  
The Commission wrote to the Spanish authorities to 
ensure that Spanish Coastal Law is applied in 
conformity with the principle of non-discrimination on 
the ground of nationality as set out in the Charter. 
Restitution of property nationalised or 
confiscated under communist regimes 
An EU citizen wrote to the Commission complaining 
against the national authorities, which have rejected 
his request for restitution of property nationalised 
under the communist regime. 
In situations where EU law does not apply, national 
legislation on the restitution of nationalised or 
confiscated property during the period of communist regimes falls under the national competence. The 
complainant should seek redress before national 
authorities, including the courts, in accordance with 
national law. How does the EU protect 
intellectual property?  
 
EN 21 Right to asylum   
The right to asylum is guaranteed by the Charter.  The Commission received a number of letters from 
citizens, asylum seekers, and refu gees concerning the implementation of EU asylum law. The EU is 
developing legislation on asylum.  
In 2010, negotiations in the European Parliame nt and the Council on a number of legislative 
proposals33 tabled by the Commission were ongoing. Th ese proposals are intended to amend some 
of the existing rules of the Common European Asylum System  with the aim to ensure higher 
standards of protection and a more uniform tr eatment of asylum seekers in Member States . The 
Commission proposals contain in pa rticular provisions on preventing arbitrary detention and on 
safeguarding human dignity with regard to detent ion conditions of asylum seekers. The proposals 
also aim to introduce greater care for ensuri ng family unity in asylum related decisions, prohibit the 
detention of unaccompanied minors  and facilitate access to effectiv e remedy for asylum applicants. 
The Court of Justice case Hasan and others34 concerned Iraqi nationals whose refugee status was 
revoked in Germany, following the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime. The Cour t highlighted that the 
provisions of relevant EU legislation35 have to be interpreted in the light of fundamental rights, in 
particular the right to asylum  as enshrined in the Charter. The Court gave a number of indications 
that help to ensure the proper  application of relevant EU legislation by Member States. 
 
 
                                                 
33 Proposal for a Regulation of the Euro pean Parliament and of the Council establis hing the criteria and mechanisms for 
determining the Member State responsible for examining an app lication for international protection lodged in one of the 
Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, CO M(2008) 820 final, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0820:FIN:EN:PDF 
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AN D OF THE COUNCIL laying down  minimum standards for the 
reception of asylum seekers, COM (2008), 815 final, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0815:FIN:EN:PDF 
Proposal for a Directive of the European  Parliament and of the Council on minimum standards for the qualification and status 
of third country nationals or st ateless persons as beneficiaries of internationa l protection and the cont ent of the protection 
granted, COM(2009) 551 final, available at:  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2009:0551:FIN:EN:PDF 
34 ECJ, Case C-175/08, Hasan and others , 2.3.2010.  
35 Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum st andards for the qualification and status of third country 
nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international prot ection and the content of the 
protection granted, OJ L 304, 30.9.2004, p. 12-23.  Compatibility of national legislation with EU rules on asylum 
A non-governmental organisation wrote to the Commission about 
the difficult situation of asylum s eekers in a Member State, claiming 
the authorities did not ensure adequate access to the asylum 
procedure or material assistance. As a consequence, many asylum 
seekers were destitute and deprived of a fair opportunity to present 
their case, which resulted in a violation of their right to asylum.  
According to EU rules on asylum, asylum seekers have a right to 
apply for asylum and to have their applications effectively examined 
by a Member State, on the basis of common criteria which 
determine who is genuinely in need of protection. EU rules entitle 
asylum seekers to reception condit ions such as accommodation. It is 
the responsibility of national author ities to ensure that these rules 
are effectively enforced.  
The Commission requested clarifications from the Member State 
and initiated infringement proceed ings regarding the compatibility 
of national legislation with EU asylum rules, in particular the 
effective access to the asylum procedure and the reception 
conditions.  Right to asylum 
A citizen of a third country wrote to the 
Commission that his application for asylum in a 
Member State was rejected and requested that 
the Commission grants him asylum. 
EU rules determine the conditions and criteria 
for recognition of third country nationals or 
stateless persons who apply for asylum in a Member State. Only competent national 
authorities can grant international protection 
depending on the individual circumstances of 
each applicant.  
The Commission replied that it has no 
competence to assess as ylum applications and 
grant international protection to individual 
applicants. Individuals who consider that they are 
not granted the rights prescribed by EU law 
should seek redress before competent national 
authorities, including courts.
 
 
EN 22 3. Equality 
 
 
  
 Among the rights and freedoms under this title, the rights of the child were most 
frequently raised in letters, questions and petitions. 
Surveys of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights show that racism and xenophobia 
continue to be a problem for many ethnic and religious minorities in the European Union and confirm the situation of exclusion of Roma people in Europe.  Equality before the law 
Non-discrimination Cultural, religious and 
linguistic diversity 
Equality between 
women and men 
The rights of the child The rights of the elderly Integration of persons 
with disabilities  
 
EN 23 
 
Non-discrimination 
The Charter prohibits any discrimination  based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or 
social origin, genetic features, lang uage, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership 
of a national minority, property, birth, disability, ag e or sexual orientation. The Charter also prohibits 
discrimination on the ground of nationality, with in the scope of applicat ion of the Treaties and 
without prejudice to any of  their specific provisions.  
Discrimination based on racial or ethnic orig in is equally a violatio n of the principle of 
equal treatment and is prohibited in the wo rkplace and outside the workplace. People 
are protected by law if, for instance, employers 
refuse promotion or training because of a person’s 
racial or ethnic origin. Outside the workplace, people 
are protected if, for example, they are refused access 
to education or higher education institution solely 
because of their racial or ethnic origin.  
In the area of employment and occupation, EU law 
prohibits discrimination on  grounds of religion or 
belief, disability, age or se xual orientation. Employers 
must base job classification systems for determining 
pay on the same criteria, regardless of religion or 
belief, disability, age, or sexual  orientation. They must also en sure reasonable accommodation to 
enable disabled people who are qualified to particip ate in training or paid labour. There are however 
situations where differences in treatment are 
authorised, such as: genuine occupational 
qualifications, differences in treatment on grounds of 
age, positive actions. Thes e situations are limited and 
must be well justified.  
In 2010, the Commission continued to follow the 
negotiations in the Counc il on its proposal for a new 
anti-discrimination Directive  intended to reduce 
discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, age, 
disability or sexual orientation beyond the workplace:  access to goods and services such as banking, 
education, transport and health.  Discrimination on ground of disability 
A disabled person complained that she could not 
have access to a museum.  
EU legislation currently provides for protection on 
the ground of disability only in the field of 
employment. The proposal for a new equal treatment 
Directive would cover these situations.  Discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin 
A person wrote to the Commission complaining that 
the public electricity compan y cut the electricity supply 
to all people in a district which was predominantly a 
Roma neighbourhood. This was done independently of 
whether the inhabitants had paid their bills.  
The Commission contacted the Member States to 
request information and the situation was 
subsequently resolved. What does the EU 
do to fight against discrimination?  
 
EN 24 The Court of Justice referred to Article 21 of the Charter in the case Kücükdeveci36 with regard to 
discrimination on ground of age . The case concerned the notice periods which an employer must 
comply with in the case of dismissal. German 
legislation prescribed that notice periods increased 
progressively according to the length of the 
employment relationship. However, periods of 
employment completed by an employee before 
reaching the age of 25 are not taken into account for 
calculating the notice period. Ms Kücükdeveci, who 
started working in the company at the age of 18, was 
dismissed at the age of 28. The company calculated 
the notice period as if she had only three years’ length of service, althou gh she had worked for the 
employer for ten years. No account was taken of the 
periods of employment completed before Ms 
Kücükdeveci was 25. She brought proceedings to 
challenge her dismissal, clai ming that the legislation 
constituted discrimination on grounds of age, 
prohibited by European Union law. In her view, the 
notice period should have been longer, 
corresponding to ten years’ service and not to three years. The Court found that the German rules on 
dismissal are discriminatory as they contain a 
difference of treatment based on age, which cannot 
be justified.  
In 2010, the Commission frequently received compla ints about alleged discrimination on a ground 
that is covered by EU law, but where EU law has b e e n  c o r r e c t l y  t r a n s p o s e d  i n  t h e  M e m b e r  S t a t e  
concerned. If transposition is correct, and the complaint concerns an individual case of wrong 
application of the law, the individual concerned 
should seek guidance from the national equality body 
or bring legal action at national level.  
The Commission is keen to see 
the principle of non-
discrimination on the basis of 
sexual orientation, as 
enshrined in the Charter, 
applied systematically in the preparation, adoption 
and implementation of EU law.  
EU citizens have the right to move and reside freely in 
another Member State, together with their families. 
The benefits of EU rules guaranteeing free movement 
and residence apply also to same-sex couples .  
In its judgment Schalk and Kopf v. Austria
37 the 
European Court of Human Rights (which is not an institution of the European Union) made a 
reference to the Charter and to provisions of two EU Directives (on family reunification and free 
movement) to strengthen the right to respect for private and family life  under the European 
Convention of Human Rights by extending the noti on of “family life” to same-sex couples. The 
European Court of Human Rights considered it "artific ial" to maintain the view  that, in contrast to a 
different-sex couple, a same-sex couple cannot enjoy ‘family life’ for the purposes of Article 8 of the 
European Convention. 
                                                 
36 ECJ, Case C-555/07, Kücükdeveci, 19.1.2010.  
37 Application no. 30141/04 of 24.6.2010.  Discrimination on grounds of political views in 
employment 
A complainant brought a court case against his 
employer on the charge that he had been 
discriminated and harassed at work because of his 
views on his country's asylum system (which he 
claimed were protected as "belief").  
The Austrian Supreme Court rejected that claim, 
stating that political views were not protected by EU 
and national equal treatment legislation.  
He then wrote to the Commission stating that the 
Supreme Court should have referred to the Court of Justice for an interpretation of the relevant EU law. He 
also claimed a violation of his rights according to the 
Charter.  
The Commission replied that  it agreed with the 
Austrian Supreme Court's inte rpretation that political 
views were not covered by EU equal treatment 
legislation. Since the case falls outside the scope of EU 
law, there could be no violation of the Charter.  
Discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation 
at work 
An individual wrote to the Commission complaining 
that he had been harassed at work because of his 
sexual orientation, and that he subsequently lost his 
job for this reason. He asked the Commission to ensure 
that the behaviour of the management of the 
company and of his co-workers is sanctioned.  
The Commission replied that the relevant EU anti-
discrimination rules had been  transposed in national 
law of that Member State. The complainant should 
initiate proceedings before national courts. The 
Commission provided references to existing national 
case law relevant to his case , and contact details of the 
national Equality Body.  What does the prohibition of discrimination on ground of 
sexual orientation mean in 
practice?  
 
EN 25 Homophobia is a mixture of negative attit udes and feelings towards lesbian, gay, 
bisexual, and transgender people. It is an unacceptable violation of human 
dignity and it is incomp atible with the founding values of the EU.38 
The EU Agency for Fundamental Rights reports that LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) 
persons experience harassment, bullyin g and discrimination across the EU.39 According to this report, 
the majority of victims of homophobic crime do no t complain to the police.  Sometimes LGBT people 
face violent physical attacks. Th e Agency is preparing a survey on  discrimination and hate crime 
towards LGBT people to be conducted in 2011. Hate  speech on the Internet is a particularly worrying 
phenomenon and so is hate speech by public figures.40 An increasing number of known personalities, 
especially in sports, have stood up for LGBT ri ghts and sent encouragements to fight against 
prejudices and stereotypes. 
Although in most Member States LGBT people co uld freely exercise their right to freedom of 
assembly, the Agency repo rts that bans or administrative obstacles created problems for the 
organisation of peaceful public LGBT demonstrations in some Member States41 and that organised 
attacks against such demonstrations have taken place in others42. 
 
 
 
                                                 
38  On 17 May 2010, on the occasion of the International Day Against Homophobia, Herman Van Rompuy, President of the 
European Council, Jerzy Buzek, President of the European Par liament, and Viviane Reding, Vice -president of the European 
Commission and Commissioner for Justice,  Fundamental Rights and Citizenship,  jointly issued messages condemning 
homophobia. 
39 EU Agency for Fundamental Rights Report "Homophobia and Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation and Gender 
Identity in the EU Member States: Part II – Th e Social Situation", March 2009, available at: 
http://www.fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/atta chments/FRA_hdgso_report-part2_en.pdf  
40 See EU Agency for Fundamental Ri ghts report above, section I.2.  
41 In Lithuania the 2010 Baltic Pride was threatened with cancellation at short notice, and in Latvia, the right to organise marc hes 
continues to be challenged by authorities.  However, LGBT NGOs subsequently succeed ed to organise their events in Poland, 
Romania and Bulgaria. See EU Agency for Fundamental Rights report on "Homophobia, Trans phobia and Discrimination on 
grounds of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, 2010 update", September 2010, available at: 
http://www.fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/atta chments/FRA-LGBT-report-update2010.pdf  
42 Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy and Sweden. See note 39.  How can the EU contribute 
to the fight against homophobia?  
 
EN 26 The Charter prohibits any discrimination on grounds of gender and enshrines 
the right to equal treatment between men and women. 
Equality between women and men must be ensured in employment, work and 
pay. In the workplace, men and women are protected against harassment and 
sexual harassment, as this is contrary to the princi ple of equal treatment. Women are also protected 
against any discriminatory practices on account of pregnancy. Men and women must be treated 
equally also as regard access to an d supply of goods and services.  
In 2010, the Commission reaffirmed  its commitment to gender equa lity by adopting the Women’s 
Charter43 and a Strategy for Equality between Women and Men (2010-2015)44. The Commission 
pointed out that despite a general trend towards mo re equality in society and on the labour market, 
progress in eliminating gender inequalities remains slow. It defined challenges and action for the 
following five priority areas: equal economic independence; equal pay for equal work and work of equal value; equality in decision-m aking; dignity, integrity and an end to gender-based violence; and 
gender equality outside the EU. Achieving progress in  all these areas would offer genuine choices to 
many women and men. 
There was an important policy development with the adoption of a proposal of the Commission 
implementing the principle of equal treatmen t between women and men in self-employment . This 
proposal provides for a maternit y allowance for female self-emplo yed workers and female spouses 
and life partners, enabling them to in terrupt their professional activities
45.   
In 2010, the Commission received a number of complaints, which conc erned claims of discrimination 
on the ground of gender in different areas.  
 
 
                                                 
43 Communication from the Commission A Strengthened Co mmitment to Equality between Women and Men A Women's 
Charter Declaration by the European Commi ssion on the occasion of the 2010 Inte rnational Women's Day in commemoration 
of the 15th anniversary of the adoption of  a Declaration and Platform for Action at the Beijing UN World Conference on 
Women and of the 30th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 
COM(2010) 78 final, available at: ht tp://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexU riServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0078:FIN:EN:PDF  
44 COM(2010) 491 final, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0491:FIN:EN:PDF  
45 Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parlia ment and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the application of the principle of equal  
treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity and repealing Council Directive 
86/613/EEC, OJ L 180, 15.7.2010, p. 1-6.  How does the EU promote 
gender equality and fight 
discrimination on grounds of 
gender?  
Discrimination on ground of gender in 
employment 
A British national complained to the Commission 
that he is discriminated against on ground of sex. He 
alleges that he was refu sed access to employment 
because he is a male, invoking the incompatibility of 
gender equality legislation in  Northern Ireland with EU 
rules.  
The Commission is investig ating this case and has 
asked for information from national authorities.  Discrimination on ground of gender regarding 
refugee status 
The Commission received a complaint arguing that 
the children of women with displaced person status are discriminated against by the Cypriot authorities. 
Contrary to children of men with displaced person 
status, they seem not to be entitled to refugee status 
and are therefore deprived of  certain refugee benefits. 
The Commission sent a request for information to 
Cyprus.  
 
EN 27 Surveys of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights show that racism and 
xenophobia continue to be a problem  for many ethnic and religious minorities 
in the European Union.46 
The EU Agency for Fundamental Rights reported a general upward trend in 
recorded racist crime  in 10 out of 12 Member States, which collected sufficiently robust criminal 
justice data.47 The number of antisemitic crimes rose in 2001-2008 in 5 out of 6 Member States, with 
adequate data in this field.48 Every tenth person with an immigr ant or ethnic minority background 
interviewed for the EU-MIDIS survey in 2008 had been  a victim of racist or xenophobic assault, threat 
or serious harassment in the past 12 months. Roma and Sub-Saharan Africans were reported to be 
particularly vulnerable to such crimes. 
The majority of the people with an immigrant or  ethnic minority background interviewed for the EU-
MIDIS survey did not report to the police even though they had been victims of assaults or threats. The non-reporting of serious harassment was even higher – depending on the group, 75% to 90% of 
these incidents went unreported.
49 The main reason for non-reporting was the victims' lack of 
confidence that the police could or would do anything in their case.50 
The EU has rules banning certain types of hate speech, for example rules requiring Member States to 
punish those who incite to violence or hatred in pu blic on the basis of race, colour, religion, descent 
or national or ethnic origin.51 From 28 November 2010 the Member States had to comply with the 
EU legislation banning racist or xenophobic hate speech . 
These rules ensure that th e same racist behaviour 
constitutes a crime in all Member States and prevent perpetrators from avoiding prosecution by moving to 
another Member State. The EU has also adopted rules 
requiring Member States to ensure that audiovisual media 
services (both broadcasts and on-demand services) 
originating in their territory do not contain any incitement 
to hatred based on race, sex, religion or nationality .
52 If the 
Commission receives evidence about the provision of 
programmes in the EU with such  content, it can launch an 
infringement procedure against the Member State. 
Hate crimes  are criminal acts that are motivated by 
intolerance or hatred against a particular group. EU rules require that the Member States impose a higher penalty for 
crimes committed with a racist or xenophobic motivation.
53  
In 2010, the Commission received a number of letters 
concerning various forms and manifestations of ra cism and xenophobia, targeted against different 
groups or individuals belonging to these groups  (Jews, Muslims, Roma, etc.). The Commission 
intervenes in cases of racism and xenophobia when the respect of EU law is in question, such as the 
EU rules banning racist or xenophobic hate speech in TV broadcasting54 or those prohibiting 
discrimination. Several letters repo rting cases of racist or antise mitic hate speech or violence 
brought to the attention of the Commission incident s that can show whether Member States have 
adapted national legislation to conform to EU rules. 
                                                 
46 See e.g. The EU Fundamental Rights Ag ency's Annual Report 2010, European Unio n Minorities and Disc rimination Survey. 
Main Results Report 2009 and Antisemi tism summary overview of the situation in the European Union 2001-2009.  
47 EU Agency for Fundamental Rights Annual Report 2010, section 2.2. The 12 countries  are Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, 
Germany, France, Ireland, Austria, Poland, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden a nd UK (England, Wales and Scotland).  
48 Ibidem . The 5 countries are Austria, France, The Netherlands, Sw eden and the UK. Germany experienced a slight downward 
trend (-0,3%).  
49 Id. at 71-72. See also European Union Minorities and Discri mination Survey. Main Results Report 2009, p. 65 and 67.  
50 Id. at 74. 
51 Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008  on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and 
xenophobia by means of criminal law, OJ L 328 of 6.12.2008, p. 55.  
52 Article 6 of the Directive 2010 /13/EU of the EP and the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions lai d 
d o w n  b y  l a w ,  r e g u l a t i o n  o r  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e  a c t i o n  i n  M e m b e r  States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services 
(Audiovisual Media Services Directive), OJ L 95. 15.4.2010, p.1.  
53 Article 4 of Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA, see above note 51.  
54 Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA a nd Audiovisual Media Services Direct ive, see above notes 51 and 52.  Al-Aqsa TV 
The Commission received a number of 
complaints regarding incite ment to hatred on the 
basis of religion, nationality or race in the 
programmes broadcast by Al-Aqsa TV. The TV 
channel was broadcast through a French operated 
satellite and was accessible to viewers in the EU. 
Such incitement to hatred is prohibited by EU 
audiovisual rules. 
In 2010, the Commission opened an 
infringement case against France. In June 2010, the French authorities requested that Al-Aqsa TV stops 
transmitting in EU, which it did. The Commission 
closed the infringement case and will continue to 
monitor new developments in close cooperation 
with the national authorities.  What does the EU do to fight 
against racism, xenophobia 
and related forms of 
intolerance?  
 
EN 28 Between 10 and 12 million Roma live in Europe. Many of them endure 
poverty, suffer discrimination and do not enjoy the same rights and 
opportunities as other EU citizens. Roma people have lower life expectancy, 
often live in precarious housing and are more fr equently unemployed. Roma children often do not 
finish school. The reports on the situation of Roma  published by the EU Agency for Fundamental 
Rights confirm the situation of exclusion of Roma people in Europe. 55 
The integration of Roma  requires that Member States and the European Union work together. The 
Commission is supporting these efforts by providing model approaches for the social and economic 
integration of Roma.56 The European Union supports the Member States financially to help integrate 
Roma communities with projects on housing, education and employment. The Roma Task Force , 
established by the Commission, aims to assist Member States in using these funds in a more effective 
way to ensure the integration of Roma people. On 21 December 2010,  the Task Force reported its 
initial findings57. It noted that while EU 
funds offer considerable potential for 
bolstering Roma inclusion, bottlenecks at 
national, regional and local levels are 
limiting their effective use by Member 
States. The Roma Task Force will continue 
its work in identifying concrete ways to 
enhance the funds’ uses. The results will 
be part of an EU framework for national Roma integration strategies in the 
Member States that will be presented by 
the Commission in spring 2011, for 
discussion in the European Parliament 
and the Council. A new study – released 
by the Commission on 21 December – 
analysed national Roma inclusion 
measures in 18 EU countries and 
identified a series of successful policy 
approaches. Integrated policies and 
projects addressing the multiple causes of 
social exclusion are the best ways to 
improve the situation of Roma in Europe, 
the study says. 
When it comes to the integration of 
Roma, funding is not th e only area that 
requires action. The rights enshrined in EU law must  b e  p r o p e r l y  e n f o r c e d  a t  n a t i o n a l  l e v e l .  T h e  
Commission closely monitors the respect of the rele vant EU rules, such as the Free Movement 
Directive
58, the antidiscrimination law59 and the law against hate speech60. 
                                                 
55 Housing conditions of Roma and Travellers in the EU  – Comparative report (Oct ober 2009), available at: 
http://www.fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachment s/ROMA-Housing-Comparative-Report_en.pdf  
The situation of Roma EU citizens movi ng to and settling in other EU Member  States (November 2009), available at: 
http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachment s/Roma_Movement_Comparative-final_en.pdf  
56 Communication on the social and economic integration of  the Roma in Europe, COM(2010)133 final, available at:  
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0133:FIN:EN:PDF  
57 Roma Integration: First Findings of Roma Task Force and Report on Social Inclusio n, MEMO/10/701, 21.12.2010, available at: 
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/10/701&type=HTML  
58 Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Co uncil 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 amending Regulation (EEC) No 
1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 
90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC, OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77–123.  
59 Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal tr eatment between persons irrespective of 
racial or ethnic origin, OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22–26. 
60 See above, note 51.  Expulsions of Roma  
In the summer of 2010, the Fren ch authorities proceeded to 
dismantle unauthorised camps on their territory and to serve 
expulsion orders and orders to leave the French territory to the 
occupants of these camps, mostly Romanian and Bulgarian Roma. 
Due to the fact that they concer ned expulsions of EU citizens, the 
Commission examined the compatibility of these measures with 
EU rules on free movement. 
National authorities have the right to decide to expel EU 
citizens or to withdraw their right of residence under certain 
strict and clear conditions. The Commission has been looking into 
whether these operations had been carried out in full compliance with these EU rules, in particular with the right of EU citizens to 
move and settle down in another EU country and the right not to 
be discriminated for belonging to a specific nationality. 
Following the request of the Commission, the French 
authorities are changing their rules in order to bring them fully in 
line with EU rules on free movement. In order to provide legal 
certainty to Member States and EU citizens it is important that 
the procedural and substantive safeguards included in EU rules 
on free movement are fully and correctly transposed by and in the Member States.How can the EU improve the situation of Roma?  
 
EN 29 In 2010, the Commission received a numb er of letters from citizens and 
associations as well as questions from  the European Parliament concerning 
the situation of persons be longing to minorities . They concerned issues such 
as: the use of regional or minority lang uages in official contacts, spelling of 
names of persons belonging to minorities in offici al documents and of street names in areas where 
minorities are present, conditions of education for minorities and the impact of electoral laws on 
minority voters. 
The respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities  is one of the founding values of the 
European Union, and is explicitly  mentioned following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty.61 The 
Charter explicitly prohibits discri mination on the basis of membersh ip of a national minority. The 
Commission ensures that Member States, wh en implementing EU law, respect the principle of non-
discrimination  provided in Article 21 of the Charte r, which prohibits any discrimination. 
In the area of language use, the Commission has developed a strategy62 to promote official, 
national, regional, minority and migrant languages in the EU . This strategy confirms the support of 
the Commission for all languages spok en in the European Union, incl uding the languages spoken by 
minorities. The Commission confirmed that a concer ted effort is required to ensure that, within 
existing resources, multilingualism is taken into acco unt across a series of EU policy areas, including 
lifelong learning, employment, social  inclusion, competitiveness, cu lture, youth and civil society, 
research and the media. The Strategy pointed ou t that a successful mult ilingualism policy could 
strengthen life chances of citizens: it may increase their employability, facilitate access to services 
and rights and contribute to solidarity through enhanced intercultural dialogue and social 
cohesion.  
It is important to remember that the Member 
States maintain general powers to take 
decisions about minorities and the use of 
languages on their respective territories. There 
is no EU law regulating the use of languages in 
Member States. The right to use a regional or a 
minority language falls under the responsibility 
of the Member States. The Council of Europe, 
an international organisation based in Strasbourg, plays a key role in that respect
63. 
Issues related to the recognition of the status 
of a minority fall under the responsibility of Member  States, which must use all means available to 
them in order to guarantee that fundamental rights are effectively protected, in accordance with the 
national and international rules.  
 
                                                 
61 Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, OJ C 115 , 9.5.2008, p. 1-388.  
62 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliame nt, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee 
and the Committee of the Regions - Multilingualism: an asset for Europe and a shared commitment, COM(2008) 566 final, 
available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriS erv/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0566:FIN:EN:PDF  
63 The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (C ETS 148) and the Framework Convention for the Protection of 
National Minorities are two instru ments from the Council of Europe.  Use of minority languages in the Member States 
An association representing a linguistic minority in one 
Member State wrote to the Commission complaining about 
various obstacles for this minority to use its own language 
in that Member State. 
As the EU has no power to adopt laws on the use of 
minority languages, the Charter cannot be used and the Commission was not able to give any follow-up to the 
complaint. 
The association may seek redress elsewhere, either 
through national authorities or the European Court of Human Rights.  What does the EU do 
concerning national and linguistic minorities?  
 
EN 30 Rights of the child  
The Charter guarantees the right to such protection  and care as is necessary for the well-being of 
children (Article 24 of the Charter). This Article is based on the United Nations Convention on the 
Rights of the Child, ratified by all 27 Member St ates. The Charter recognises children as bearers of 
autonomous rights, not just as subjects in need of protection. It recognises the need to protect 
children from abuse, neglect, violations of thei r rights and situations which endanger their well-
being.  
The Charter provides that best interests of the child  must be a primary 
consideration in all actions relating to  children. This principle applies to all 
actions concerning children. It includes ch ildren's right to maintain contact with 
both parents in case of a divorce, the right to express their 
views freely and for their views to be taken into 
consideration on matters which concern them. An important 
principle of the Charter is that  when decisions are being 
made on what is in the best in terests of children, children 
should have the opportunity to express their views and these 
views should be taken into account .  
In 2010,  the Commission discussed the rights of the child 
with a wide sample of children from all 27 Member States  
and from different backgrounds , including ethnic minorities. 
Children with special needs also participated in the 
discussions.64  
Some  children are particularly vulnerab le, and letters from the general public and questions from the 
European Parliament reflect this, in particular as  regards children who live in poverty, children with 
special needs, children with out parents and those living in care in stitutions, those who are trafficked 
or sexually abused, children from ethnic minorities, such as Roma, Sinti or traveller children, or 
children in migration ne ed special protection. 
In 2010, the issue of administrative decisions on the removal of the child from 
the custody of one or both parents was raised in a number of letters from the 
general public and questions from the European Parliament. Moreover, EU 
rules65 make it easier for the separating parents to know which court will be 
deciding in case of dispute over the custody of thei r child. They also make it  easier for the parents to 
have court decisions recognised in another Member  State, for example the decisions concerning 
custody of the child and how often and under what conditions the other parent may visit the child. 
Finally, in cases when a parent who does not have custody rights takes the child to another Member 
State and breaches the decision of the court (this is also known as 'parental abduction'), these rules 
make it easier to seek the child's return back to the carer.  The Commission is not in a position to re-
examine the merit of a decision made by a national  court in individual ca ses concerning custody 
arrangements. These decisions can be appealed against in front of  the competent national courts. 
The same can be said about national ru les concerning custody of children.  
                                                 
64 Eurobarometer Qualitative study on the Righ ts of the Child, October 2010, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/a rchives/quali/ql_right_child_sum_en.pdf  
65 Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 co ncerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of 
judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental re sponsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, OJ L 
338, 23.12.2003, p.1-29.  Right to information in criminal 
proceedings 
The Commission adopted in 2010 a draft 
law to guarantee the right of suspects to 
receive information during criminal 
proceedings.  
The proposal takes into account the 
children's best interests. It ensures that in the 
case of an arrest, children receive information about their rights in the proceedings in a 
manner that they can understand.  How are the best interests 
of children protected in EU 
legislation?  
How can EU rules help 
in cross-border custody 
cases?  
 
EN 31 The first judgement  of the Court of Justice (the "Deti ček case")66 after the entry into force of the 
Treaty of Lisbon in which the Court applied the Charter  concerned custody rights after the break up 
of a marriage between parents from two 
different Member States.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
Another area of conc ern in letters and parliamentary questions in 2010 was the issue 
of missing children . Children may go missing regardless of their age, gender or social 
status. When a child goes missing there are enormous risks involved; risks to their 
safety, mental and physical health, well-bein g and life. They can suffer violence and 
abuse. They can be trafficked or exposed to begging and prostitution . In 2010, the Commission 
received a number of letters and questions related to the problem of missing children.  
In 2010, sexual exploitation of children 
and child pornography  were raised in a 
number of questions and letters. Sexual 
exploitation of children can take many 
forms, such as forcing a child into 
prostitution, profiting from such acts, 
forcing a child to have sex, and paying 
money to have sex with children. In 2010, 
the Commission proposed new rules to 
fight sexual abuse of children and child 
pornography . This proposal is aimed at 
prosecuting offenders, preventing offences and protecting victims. It raises the level of 
protection and assistance provided to child 
victims, ensures that children have easier 
access to justice and do not suffer 
additional trauma in legal proceedings. 
                                                 
66 ECJ, Case C-403/09 PPU, Detiček, 23.12.2009.  Dial 116 000: The European ho tline for missing children
116 000 is a single telephone number reserved in all 
Member States as a hotline to report missing children and 
offer emotional help and support to the parents of the 
missing child. At the end of  2010, two years after the 
Commission reserved the number, the hotline was operational 
only in 13 Member States. 
In 2010, the Commission in the Communication Dial 116 
000: The European hotline for missing children  identified the 
following obstacles preventing  the implementation of the 
116000 hotline: 
1) Lack of information about the existence of the 
reserved 116 000 number; 
2) Cost of running the hotline. How can the EU 
help when children 
go missing?  The Detiček case  
The divorce court in Italy, where the child was residing, 
awarded temporary custody to the father. The mother then 
took the child to Slovenia. After the Italian temporary judicial 
decision was recognised in Slovenia, the mother requested that provisional custody is awarded to her by the Slovenian court, 
arguing that the child had now settled in Slovenia with her 
mother and therefore circumstances had changed.  
The Court applied the Charter and stated that not respecting 
an already issued and recognised Italian judicial decision would 
be contrary to the child's best interest. The child's fundamental 
right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and 
direct contact with both parents guaranteed by the Charter 
would also be violated.
 
 
EN 32 Thousands of children who are non-EU nationals and who arrive in the EU 
without their parents or guardians (unaccompanied children) represent one of 
the most vulnerable groups of childre n. According to the EU Agency for 
Fundamental Rights these children, even when under State care, may live in unsuitable 
accommodation (including in detention, waiting for a decision on their application for asylum ), lack 
quality medical care, equal access to appropriate education and training. They can be victims of 
discrimination or even mistreated, and they are of ten insufficiently informed about legal procedures 
and opportunities available to them.67 These children are particularly vulnerable to becoming victims 
of organised crime, such as human trafficking, pr ostitution, sexual abuse, illegal human organ trade, 
or recruitment to engage  in criminal activities. Based on a proposal by the Commission, the EU 
adopted in 2010 a plan68 to increase the protection of unaccompanie d migrant children in the EU . 
This plan is based on the rights laid down in the Charter. 
In 2010, the Commission also received many lette rs and questions concerning the quality of 
treatment of disabled children living separated from their parents in state institutions . The 
Commission has no powers under the Charter to intervene in this area. The Commission supports 
Member States in their efforts to provide institutio nal care and long-term care services to children 
with disabilities.69 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
67 EU Agency for Fundamental Rights Repo rt "Separated, asylum-seeking children in  EU Member States", November 2010, 
available at: http://www.fra.europa.e u/fraWebsite/attachments/FRA-fullrepor t-sep-asylum-conference-2010_EN.pdf  
68 Communication from the Commission on Ac tion Plan on Unaccompanie d Minors (2010 – 2014), COM(2010)213 final, available 
at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0213:FIN:EN:PDF  
69 The financial support was provided from European So cial Fund and European Regional and Development Fund.  EU action plan for un accompanied children  
The plan, adopted in 2010, pr ovides that unaccompanied 
children must be treated in accordance with the Charter. All 
actions must respect the best interests of an individual 
child.  
Children should be protected from traffickers and 
criminal groups and all forms of violence or exploitation. Every effort should be made to find the family of the child 
and to reunite the child with his or her family provided that 
this is the best solution for th e child involved. Every child 
must have access to legal representation.  
A decision on the future of each child should be taken 
within the shortest time po ssible. Unaccompanied children 
should always be placed in an appropriate accommodation 
and treated in a way so that their physical and mental well-
being is preserved.  How does the EU protect 
unaccompanied children?  
Prohibition of detention of unaccompanied 
children in asylum procedures 
In 2010, negotiations in the European 
Parliament and the Council continued on a number 
of legislative proposals in the area of asylum tabled by the Commission.  
The Commission proposals provide for an 
absolute prohibition of the detention of 
unaccompanied children.
 
 
EN 33 The rights of the elderly 
The Charter provides that the Union recognizes and re spects the rights of the elderly to lead a life of 
dignity and independence and to participate in social and cultural life. 
The number of older people will rise rapidly over th e coming years, notably as a result of the 'baby-
boom' cohorts reaching retirement age. This will make  it increasingly difficult for Member States to 
ensure that the elderly can lead a life of dignity and independence and that they can participate in 
social and cultural life. The Commissio n proposed, in September 2010, to designate 2012 as 
European Year for Active Ageing . The aim of this European Year is to raise awareness of ageing and 
its implications and to encourage stakeholders at all levels to take new initiatives that will remove 
obstacles to older people playing an active role on  the labour market and in society and to ensure 
that they can stay autonomous for as long as possible. EU will promote longer active life and higher 
social participation of the elderly to the societ y and the empowerment of elderly people (who can 
contribute to the society through their experience and voluntary work).  
EU supports research on the prevention of Alzheime r's disease. In the context of the Europe 2020 
strategy, under the Innovation Union, the EU has launched a pilot European Partnership on Active 
and Healthy Ageing. 
Integration of persons with disabilities 
The Charter provides that the Union recognises and re spects the right of pers ons with disabilities to 
benefit from measures designed to ensure their i ndependence, social and occupational integration 
and participation in the life of the community. 
To empower women and men with disabilities so th ey can enjoy their full rights and benefit fully 
from their participation in society,  the Commission in 2010 launched the Disability strategy70. The 
Strategy identifies eight priority areas: accessibilit y, participation, equali ty, employment, education 
and training, social protection, health and external  action. In December 2010, the EU became party 
to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) . The Strategy defines EU 
mechanisms to implement this convention, which will supplement national action. 
 
 
                                                 
70 Communication European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe, COM(2010) 636 
final, available at: http://eur-l ex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ .do?uri=COM:2010:0636:FIN:EN:PDF  
 
EN 34  
4. Solidarity 
 
 
   
 
  
  
 
  
 Workers' right to 
information and 
consultation within the 
undertaking  
Right of collective 
bargaining and action  
Right of access to placement services
 
Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal
 
Fair and just working conditions
 
Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work
 
Family and professional life
 
Social security and social assistance
 
Health care  
Access to services of 
general economic 
interest  
Environmental protection
 
Consumer protection  Against the background of the current crisis with its grave socio-economic impacts, the 
Commission took action to apply EU instruments to the fundamental rights of workers. A number of important judgements of the Court of Justice used the Charter in order to clarify EU rules in this area.  
Charter rights and freedoms under this title are implemented through a number of EU 
legislative acts. Title Solidarity contains seve ral provisions, which provide guidance to 
EU institutions when drafting EU rules an d to Member States only when they are 
implementing EU law.  
 
EN 35  
 
Workers' right to information and consultation 
The Charter provides that workers or their repr esentatives must, at the appropriate levels, be 
guaranteed information and consultation in g ood time in the cases and under the conditions 
provided for by EU law and national 
laws and practices. 
Several EU Directives guarantee the 
right of workers to information and 
consultation at work. Against the 
background of the current crisis with 
its grave socio-economic impacts, 
the Commission deployed efforts in 
2010 to enable the effective use of 
this fundamental right by workers affected by the restructuring or the 
closure of the companies employing 
them. The Commission launched a 
"fitness check" aiming at  ensuring 
that current EU law is 'fit for 
purpose' . The Commission is 
focussing on the three EU laws 
providing for workers' right to information and consultation at national company level
71 and aims to 
verify whether these laws are responsive to current and future challenges, ta king also into account 
the current crisis, and to identify excessive burdens, gaps, inconsistencies and/or obsolete measures 
which may have appeared over time. This review cl osely associates governments and social partners, 
and is expected to produce concrete findings by 2012 on the effectiveness, efficiency and added 
value of existing EU rules, and on the need to ta ke further action in this area. The Commission also 
supported best practices in the field of information and consultation of employees72. 
                                                 
71 Excluding the level of EU-scale undertaki ngs which is regulated by the recently adopted European Works Council directive.  
72 Budget heading 04.03.03.03 In formation, Consultation and Participation of representatives of under takings, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/mai n.jsp?catId=157&langId=en&ca llId=242&furtherCalls=yes  
See also budget heading 04.03. 03.01 and Prog ress programme.  A text message (SMS) to workers that the factory is going to 
close 
The employees of a shoe factory received a text message (SMS) 
while on holiday stating: ‘The Company will close on Monday. You 
will receive a letter informing yo u that you have been made 
redundant.' Upon their return, th ey found the factory closed.  
The Commission in these cases referred to EU law which provides 
for employees' representatives to be informed and consulted in good time and in any case before  the employer takes a decision to 
close the undertaking or to effect collective dismissals. The Member 
State in question had transposed EU law correctly.  
In this case, the competent national  authorities, and in particular 
the national courts, are there to ensure the correct and effective 
application of the EU law on info rming and consulting workers, and 
to guarantee that employ ers fulfill their duties.
 
 
EN 36 In 2010, shortcomings in this area were reflected in a series of 
parliamentary questions, for example in the cases of job losses at big 
automotive plants, of the closure of a plant with 1000 employees owned by 
a company invoking United States bankruptcy laws, and of the 
reorganisation of financial instit utions. The Commission assisted Member 
States in the implementation process of the new legal framework for European Works Councils 
adopted in 2009. The changes to be implemented by  June 2011 aim to ensure the effectiveness of 
employees’ transnational informat ion and consultation rights. 
In 2010, the Commission answered several parlia mentary questions on concrete cases where 
employees have allegedly not been properly in formed and consulted in restructuring cases. 
As EU law currently stands, seagoing workers are excluded or may be excluded, if Member States so 
decide, from the EU Di rectives' provisions according to wo rkers the right to information and 
consultation. The Commission launched two consultation s with the European social partners in 2010, 
and is currently working on an impact assessment on the various options available with a view 
eventually to suppress this exclusion and extend to seagoing workers this fundamental right. 
Right of collective bargaining and action 
The Charter provides that workers and employers,  or their respective organisations, have, in 
accordance with EU law and national laws and practices, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels and, in  cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective 
action to defend their interest s, including strike action. 
There is no specific EU law regulating the conditions and consequences of the exercise of these rights 
at national level
73. Member States remain of course bound by  the provisions of the Charter, including 
the right to strike, in instances where they implement EU law. Examples of such instances can be 
found in cases brought before the Court of Justice. 
The Laval case74 concerned mainly the question of 
whether Swedish trade unions may exercise the 
right to strike in order to force a Latvian company 
providing services in Sweden to negotiate on the 
working conditions of its posted workers including those which went beyond what was allowed by the 
EU Directive on posting of workers
75. In the wake of 
the Laval and other judgments76, the Commission 
stepped up its efforts to promote debate with 
stakeholders and facilitate administrative 
cooperation among Member States in cases of 
posting of workers. In order to have a 
comprehensive and clear view of the issues at stake, 
the Commission carried out in 2010 major  studies of 
the legal as well as econom ic and social effects of 
the posting of workers Directive  w i t h  a  v i e w  t o  
reviewing the legal framework in the context of the 
provision of services.  
In 2010, the Commission has been paying special 
attention to transnational company agreements77. 
Transnational company agreements are texts 
resulting from transnational negotiations at 
corporate level covering situations located in the 
                                                 
73 Article 153(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFE U) stipulates that it does not apply to the right to strike.  
74 ECJ, Case C-341/05, Laval , 18.12.2007.  
75 Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Co uncil of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in 
the framework of the provision of services, OJ L 018, 21.01.1997, p. 1-6.  
76 Compare: ECJ, Case C-346/06, Rüffert , 3.4.2008 and ECJ, Case C-319/06, Commission v Luxembourg , 19.6.2008.  
77 See: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=707&langId=en&intPageId=214  How effective is the right to 
information and consultation of 
workers in EU-scale 
(multinational) undertakings? 
Right to take industrial action 
A Member of the European Parliament brought to 
the attention of the Commission that some trade 
unions had reached an agreement with their employer 
to continue manufacturing in Italy, preventing the threatened closure of the factory and the subsequent 
lay-offs of thousands of workers, in exchange for a 
reduction of the right to strike (guaranteed by the 
Italian Constitution). The exercise of this right would 
be punishable by disciplin ary action, the ultimate 
sanction being dismissal.  
The Commission replied that, although the right to 
take industrial action must be recognised as a 
fundamental right which forms an integral part of the general principles of EU law, there did not seem to be 
any link with any EU legislative act in this case. It was 
therefore for the competent Italian authorities, 
including the courts, to assess the legality of the 
restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike in this 
case, and to enforce the relevant national legislation 
with due regard for the applicable international 
obligations of the Member State.  
 
EN 37 different countries where the European/multinational companies operate or which are affected by 
corporate decisions. So far, the Commission’s serv ices have recorded some 200 transnational 
company agreements and joint texts in 100 comp anies employing together 9.8 million employees. 
These agreements usually deal with restructuring, reorganisation and anticipative measures, as well 
as with employment policy, mobility and training. They also deal with  data protection, ethics, health 
and safety at work, working conditions and equal opportunities. They count among the most 
innovative actions in developing socially respon sible companies. They ar e an effective tool for 
promoting the respect of fundamental rights in multinational companies and among their 
stakeholders. 
Access to placement services 
The Charter guarantees that everyone has the right of access to a free placement service. 
The right of citizens to access placement servic es is implemented in the EU by the provision of 
services free of charge to jobseekers (both unemployed and job changers) by Public Employment 
Services (PES). In its Communication on 'Youth on  the Move' of 15 September 2010 , the 
Commission called upon the Member States to ensure that all young people are in a job, further 
education or activation measures within four mo nths of leaving school. This may often require 
extending the support of Public Employment Services.  
EURES, the co-operation network between the Commission and the Pu blic Employment Services of 
the EEA Member States and other partner organisations, provides information, advice and 
recruitment/placement (job-matching) services for the benefit of workers and employers as well as 
any citizen wishing to benefit from the principle of the free movement of persons. In 2010 the EURES 
network further developed its service provision in the area of placements of mobile jobseekers  
and defined placement services to citizens as one of its strategic objective for the network. In 2010 
the EURES network had around 2 million contacts with cl ients in the fields of information, advice and 
placement. 
 
 
 
EN 38 Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal 
The Charter provides that every worker has the righ t to protection against unjustified dismissal, in 
accordance with EU law and national laws and practices. 
EU legislation prohibiting discrimina tion on certain grounds, such as  nationality, ge nder, racial or 
ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or se xual orientation, covers also cases of unjustified 
dismissals. Some EU Directives in the area of work ers' information and consultation provide also for 
the protection of employees’ representatives, in particular where they are dismissed on grounds of 
their status or functions as an employees’ representative.  
In 2010, the Commission replied to several letters  from citizens and parliamentary questions 
concerning individual dismissals. On several o ccasions, it clarified that, apart from the 
aforementioned instances, there are no specific EU rules proh ibiting employers from dismissing 
individuals without mentioning any reason. Nor are th ere, as indicated above,  any specific EU rules 
regulating the timing, the method  or the consequences of individual dismissals. Individuals affected 
by a dismissal that they see as unjustified must take this matter to court in the Member State 
concerned. 
Fair and just working conditions 
The Charter guarantees that every worker has the right to working conditions which respect his or 
her health, safety and dignity. Every worker has th e right to limitation of maximum working hours, to 
daily and weekly rest periods and to an annual period of paid leave 
There is a substantial body of EU law in this area concerning in particular health and safety at work78. 
The Commission continued to pay particular attentio n to the effective and correct implementation in 
the Member States of the Framework Health and Safe ty Directive, as this law determines the specific 
working conditions that should  be ensured for every worker. 
In 2010, the Commission adopted a Report on the implementation of the Working Time Directive  79, 
accompanied by a Staff Working Paper setting out the rules and rulings of  the Court of Justice 
regarding organisation of Working Time. The Commission is currently undertaking a review of this Directive, based on a consultation of the social  partners at EU level and on a detailed impact 
assessment, which is expected to lead to a prop osal to amend the existing rules during 2011.  
In 2010, the Court of Justice issued several judgments clarifying further the EU rules on maximum 
weekly working time , rest periods and paid annual leave. In one case
80 a fire-fighter was required to 
work an average of 54 hours per week instead of the maximum average of 48 hours per week under 
the Directive. When the fire-fight er insisted on the 48-hour limit, he was moved to a different job 
against his will, where the 48-hour limit applied. Th e Court ruled that national rules which obliged a 
worker to work longer than 48 hours per week on average were contrary to the Working Time 
Directive and therefore unlawful, and that nation al rules allowing a public sector employer to 
transfer a worker compulsorily to another job for as king to work within the 48-hour limit were also 
unlawful. Although the Directive does not specifica lly lay down that a worker could not be penalised 
for insisting on their right not to exceed the Direct ive's limit to weekly working time, the Court based 
its reasoning upon Article 47 of th e Charter which states that the la w must give effective protection 
to legal rights.  
In another case81, the Court decided that workers employed in casual work in holiday and leisure 
centres are entitled to periods of rest. It was not en ough for French law to restrict this type of work 
                                                 
78 The central piece is the Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction  o f  m e a s u r e s  t o  e n c o u r a g e  
improvements in the safety and health of workers at work, OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1-8, which lays down general principles on 
the protection of workers' health and safe ty. Several specific directives cover a numbe r of specific risks, e.g. exposure of 
workers to biological and chemical agents  at work, noise, work at the constructi on sites, manual handling of loads, etc. 
Another important piece of legislation co vers working time and regulates issues such as minimum daily and weekly rest 
periods, breaks, maximum weekly work ing time, night work and annual leave.  
79 Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the 
organisation of working time, OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p. 9–19.  
80 ECJ, Case C-243/09 Fuss (I) , 14.10.2010.  
81 ECJ, Case C-428/09 Isère , 14.10.2010.  
 
EN 39 to a maximum of 80 days every year as this did not protect the workers' health and safety during 
working hours. The Court specifically mentioned how important it is to have rest breaks every day to 
help workers recover from work but also to prevent risks to their health and safety.  
A third case82 dealt with the working conditions of part -time public servants in comparison to full-
time workers. The Court found that it was unlawful to reduce the amount of paid annual leave a 
worker had been entitled to under a full-time job where he/she changes to a part-time job. 
Protection of young people at work 
The Charter provides that young people admitted to work must have working conditions appropriate 
to their age and be protected against economic expl oitation and any work likely to harm their safety, 
health or physical, mental, moral or social deve lopment or to interfere with their education. 
In 2010, the Commission services produced a report on the evaluation and impact of the 
application of the Directive on the protection of young people at work83. The Directive has played a 
role in helping improve the legal protection affo rded to young people. Young people would have 
been at greater risk of suffering work accidents than older workers, without the special protection 
afforded by the Directive. Accordin g to available data, the standardised incidence rate of accidents at 
work with more than three days lost for youn g workers fell from more than 3 % in 1995 to 
approximately 2.5 % in 2000 and 1.9 % in 2004. Alth ough, surprisingly, the rate increased in 2005 to 
almost 2.8 % (in the EU-15), it dropped again to about 2.5 % in 2007. The corresponding rate for the overall workforce was about 2.8 % and 3.8 % for work ers in the 18 – 24 age group. The standardised 
incidence rate of fatal accidents at work was also lower for young workers than that for the other 
two groups.  
Social security  
The Charter recognises the entitlement to social se curity benefits and soci al services providing 
protection in cases of maternity, illness, industrial accidents, depend ency or old age, and in the case 
of loss of employment. Everyone residing and moving legally within the European Union is entitled to 
social security benefits and social advantages in  accordance with Union law and national laws and 
practices. Member States are free to determine the details of their social security systems, including 
which benefits shall be provided, the conditions of eligibility, how these benefits are calculated, as 
well as how much contribution should be paid. Howe ver, European rules ensu re that the application 
of the different national legislati ons respects the basic principles of equality of treatment and non-
discrimination. They guarantee that migrant EU wo rkers are treated alike with the national workers 
and that the application of the 
different national legislations 
does not adversely affect them. 
In 2010, the Commission 
continued to monitor the 
application of the EU rules on 
social security coordination  to 
ensure that people moving 
across borders within the EU do 
not lose their entitlements to 
benefits. For instance in case of 
pensions, the EU rules 
guarantee that in each Member 
State the insurance record is 
preserved until the worker reaches pensionable age. 
Similarly, when dealing with a claim for unemployme nt benefits, institutions must take into account 
periods of insurance completed in other Member Stat es if this is necessary to the entitlement to the 
benefit. For people working and residing in different Member States, EU law determines where they 
                                                 
82 ECJ, Case C-486/08, Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenhäuser Tirols , 22.4.2010.  
83 Council Directive 94/33/EC of 22 June 1994 on the protection of young people at work, OJ L 216, 20.08.1994, p. 12-20.  Family benefits for EU citizens working in another Member State 
The Commission received a request from a Polish national who lived 
with her children in Poland while her husband worked and lived in Austria. Her husband’s application fo r family benefits in Austria was 
refused on the ground that his children did not live with him under the 
same roof and were not part of the worker's household.  
The Commission considered this as  unacceptable because EU law 
provides that if children are main ly dependent on the worker they 
should be considered as family members and should therefore be 
entitled to the family benefits from the Member State of employment of 
the worker.  
Following the intervention of th e Commission the complainant was 
granted Austrian family benefits, including unpaid benefits from the 
past.
 
EN 40 have to pay their social security contributions and which country is responsible to provide them 
healthcare or pay family benefits . In 2010, the Commission replied to a large number of complaints 
coming from individuals and took action wherever necessary. 
 
 
 
Consumer protection  
The Charter provides that Union policies shall en sure a high level of consumer protection. This 
provision provides guidance to the EU institutions  when drafting and appl ying EU legislation.  
The objective of ensuring a high level of consumer protection guided the ongoing negotiations in the 
Council and the European Parliament on the proposed Directive on Consumer Rights  and the 
Commission's work on the modernisation of the Package Travel Directive . Through infringement 
proceedings, the Commission made sure that the protection gr anted by different consumer 
protection directives, e.g. the Directive on the sale  of consumer goods, is e ffectively guaranteed in 
national law.  
In 2010, the Commission received a number of lette rs from the general public regarding consumer 
protection in various situations, such as faulty products, time share, package travel, insurance, 
distance (e.g. online) marketing of  products and services and unfa ir commercial practices. As the 
Commission cannot intervene in disputes between consumers and operators, it informed citizens on 
the EU rules and referred them to the relevant 
national authorities and European Consumer 
Centres.  
 
 
 Consumer protection regarding package travel 
An EU citizen who had bought a package holiday 
from a tour operator in another Member State did 
not receive a full refund when the tour operator 
became insolvent.  
Following the complaint, the Commission 
contacted that Member State, which subsequently amended the national rules transposing the EU's 
Package Travel Directive, which protects consumers 
in such a situation. 
 
EN 41 5. Citizens' rights 
 
 Right to vote and to 
stand as a candidate at 
elections to the European Parliament  
Right to vote and to 
stand as a candidate at municipal elections
 
Right to good administration
 
Right of access to 
documents  
European Ombudsman  
Right to petition  
Freedom of movement 
and of residence  
Diplomatic and consular 
protection  While other titles of the Charter contain rights that benefit everyone in the EU, 
irrespective of their nationality, this title mainly contains rights of EU citizens - 
nationals of the Member States. Nevertheless, right to good administration, access to documents and freedom of movement also extend to non-EU nationals in certain situations.  
Among the rights and freedoms under this title, freedom of movement and residence 
were the top issues in 2010, in terms of letters, questions and petitions to the 
Commission.  
The main developments on EU Citizenship rights since the entry into force of the 
Lisbon Treaty are detailed in the "EU Citizenship Report 2010 – Dismantling obstacles to EU citizens' rights", and the "Report on  progress towards effective EU citizenship 
2007-2010", both published on 27 October 2010.  
 
EN 42 
 
 
Right to vote and stand as a candidate at elections 
The Charter guarantees the right of every EU citize n to vote in the European elections in whatever 
Member State they reside. The Charter also provides for the right of EU citizens to vote and to stand 
as candidates at municipal elections in the Member State in which they reside. These rights 
represent the cornerstone of democracy at the EU le vel. They are essential for connecting EU citizens 
with directly elected representatives at the EU level – Members of the European Parliament. They 
are also crucial in allowing EU citizens to influe nce the political environmen t at the local level – by 
voting or standing in the municipal elections when  living in a Member State other than their own.  
The report84 from the Commission on the 
2009 European Parliament elections assessed 
the implementation of EU election rules85. The 
report concludes that citizens are aware of 
their electoral rights. While in 2007 only 54% 
of the respondents knew that EU citizens have the right to vote in European elections in the 
Member State of residence, awareness of this 
right improved to 69% in 2010. Increasing 
numbers of EU citizens residing in a Member 
State other than their own exercised their 
right to vote. 
The report presented measures for improving 
participation and for enforcing EU citizens' 
electoral rights. It revealed that a number of Member States only allow their own nationals to 
become members of political parties or to found one. This means that EU citizens from other 
Member States living there cannot fu lly participate in political life a nd exercise their electoral rights. 
The Commission has been looking into the legislation of these Member States and is taking 
appropriate measures to remedy this problem. 
                                                 
84 Report on the election of Members of the European Parliame nt (1976 Act as amended by De cision 2002/772/EC, Euratom) 
and on the participation of European Un ion citizens in elections for the Europe an Parliament in the Member State of 
residence (Directive 93/109/EC), COM(2010) 605 final, available at: 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0605:FIN:EN:PDF  
85 Council Directive 93/109/EC laying  down detailed arrangements for the exercise of  the right to vote and stand as a candidate 
in elections to the European Parliament for citizens of the Unio n residing in a Member State of  which they are not nationals, 
OJ L 329, p. 34.  Voting in the Member State of residence 
An EU citizen wrote to the Commission complaining 
about the conditions for enrolling as a voter when residing 
in a Member State other than his own.  
He claimed his electoral rights were violated because of 
additional requirements imposed on him, namely to 
present an ID card issued by  the country of residence.  
The Commission contacted the Member State to ensure 
that national legislation does not impose additional 
requirements on citizens from other Member States when 
registering to vote. The Member State agreed to amend its 
legislation. 
 
EN 43 The Commission analysed how Member States respect EU election rules86 on early publication of 
results of the European Parliament elections. It will now take measures to ensure Member States 
follow these rules.  
In 2010, the Commission finalised a comparative study  on potential common EU principles regarding 
electoral arrangements. This study provides informat ion on how EU electoral rules could be changed 
in the future. 
 
 
                                                 
86 The 1976 Act on the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal su ffrage, as amended by Council 
Decision of 25 June 2002 and 23 Septem ber 2002 amending the Act concerning the election of the representatives of the 
European Parliament by direct universal su ffrage, annexed to Decision 76/787/ECSC, EEC, Euratom, OJ L 283, 21.10.2002, p. 1-
4. 
 
EN 44 Right to good administration  
Every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a 
reasonable time by the Institutions, bodies and agenci es of the Union. It also includes the right to be 
heard and to receive a reply. 
A huge number of enquiries is addressed by citizens to the Commission, 
whether by phone, e-mail or correspondence. The Commission commits itself 
to answer them in the most appropriate manner and as quickly as possible. 
The Commission receives a large number of letters fr om the general public. Ef ficiently managing this 
correspondence can have a positive impact on the right to good administration. The general rule 
applied in the Commission is that every letter is regist ered and, with the exception of those that are 
unreasonable, repetitive or abusive, should receive a reply within 15 working days from the date of 
receipt of the letter. At the end of 2010, all Commission services had migrated to one common 
registering tool, called ARES , helping services to interact amon g themselves and to give quicker 
follow-up to correspondence. The Commission also takes care that replies are sent in the language of 
the author of the correspondence, provided that it was written in one of the official language of the 
Union. 
For complaints and enquiries by citizens on the application of EU law, the Commission introduced 
CHAP ("Complaint Handling") , an IT tool for registering and managing this specific kind of 
correspondence. In 2010, 4020 files were created in  CHAP (83% complaints against 17% inquiries). 
CHAP interoperates with ARES and with EU Pilot , a tool developed by the Commission to address 
enquiries and complaints by citizens on applicatio n of EU law through dialogue with Member States. 
In 2010, three additional Member States joined the EU Pilot, bringing the total number of Member 
States participating at the end of 2010 to 18. EU pilot allows for early clarification on whether an 
infringement of EU law exists and its correction, thus avoiding recourse to formal infringement 
proceedings. It enables faster response to citize ns' concerns and improves cooperation between the 
Commission and the Member States.  
The right to good administration is releva nt in different areas of EU law. One 
of them is competition , where the Commission is entrusted with making 
sure markets function properly (i.e. th at competition in the internal market 
is not distorted because of anticompetitive agreements, abuses of dominant 
position or mergers). To achieve this, the Commission has the task of  
preventing or correcting behaviour that would restrain  or distort competition. It has a wide range of 
inspection and enforcement powers (e.g. to investigate businesses, impose fines and/or remedies). 
This allowed the Commission to bring successful  action against many companies because 
competition was distorted and harm to consum ers and competitors was likely or had already 
occurred. In 2010, the Commission sanctioned several agreements between companies that fixed 
prices, over products as divers e as bathroom fittings and anim al feed. Commission action saved 
consumers money by making sure they do not have to pay more for the same product, making a real difference to the daily lives of millions of Europeans. 
To provide transparency and better understanding in the light of the Right to good administration, 
the Commission in 2010 published explanations  concerning how these procedures work in 
practice .
87 This makes it easier for companies unde r investigation to understand how the 
investigation will proceed, what they can expect  from the Commission and what the Commission will 
expect from them.88  
                                                 
87 The explanations are outlined in three documents: Best Practi ces for antitrust proceedings, Best  Practices for the submission 
of economic evidence (both in antitrust and merger proceedings ) and Guidance on the role of  the Hearing Officers in the 
context of antitrust proceedings.  
88 The Best Practices should be read in conjunction with the re levant legislative, interpretati ve and administrative measures 
which govern proceedings before the Commission. Proceedings concerning the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are in 
particular regulated by Regulation 1/2003 (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p.1) and the Implementing Regulation 773/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p.18). Also the Notices on access to file (OJ C 325, 22.12.2005, p.7) and handling of complaints (OJ C 101, How does the Commission 
put into practice the right to 
good administration?  
What is the impact of the 
right to good administration on EU com
petition rules?
 
EN 45 In 2010, the European Ombudsman dealt with 164 cases, where the citizen 
alleged that the administration had failed to reply adequately or at all. 
                                                                                                                                                         
27.4.2004, p.65) as well as the Hearing Officers' Mandate (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p.21) contain numerous provisions that are 
relevant. Right to be heard regarding a ban on entry to 
Commission buildings 
A person wrote to the European Ombudsman that the 
Commission imposed a ban on entry to Commission 
buildings against him on the grounds of alleged 
harassment of EU staff.  
The European Ombudsman concluded that there had 
been a breach of the right to be heard as the 
complainant had not been  given the possibility to 
present his observations before an entry ban was 
adopted.  How does the European 
Ombudsman put into 
practice the right to good 
admini stration? 
 
EN 46 Right of access to documents  
The Charter guarantees that any EU citizen and an y natural or legal person residing or having its 
registered office in a Member State, has a right of  access to documents of the EU institutions, bodies, 
offices and agencies. 
In 2010, the Commission received over 6.000 reques ts for access to documents, compared to about 
5.000 in 2008 and 2009. As in the past, 4 out of 5 re quests were granted at th e initial stage. In 2010, 
the Commission received 184 confirma tory applications. Su ch applications are reassessed by case 
handlers acting independently from the ones that ha ndled the initial applicat ion. This review has led 
to wider access being granted in around half the cases. In 2010, the European Ombudsman dealt 
with 22 cases concerning the fundamental right of access to documents. 
The Court of Justice delivered several judgements concerning access to documents. In the first case89 
the Court of Justice overruled the Court of First Instance in a case where access to a Commission 
document containing names of individuals was sought.90 The Commission had refused to disclose the 
names of persons that had not given their consent to disclosure. The Court concluded that the EU 
rules on the protection of personal data91 become applicable in their entirety. The Commission 
therefore had rightly verified if the data subjec ts had given their consent to the disclosure of 
personal data concerning them. The second case92 concerned access to Co mmission's administrative 
files in state-aid cases. The Court held an a pplicant can refute the general presumption of 
inaccessibility. An applicant can rebut the presumpt ion and demonstrate that a particular document 
should not be covered by it or th at there is an overriding public interest in disc losure. The third 
case93 concerned access to Commission submissions in Co urt cases. The Court held that there is a 
general presumption that disclosure of written su bmissions in pending Cour t cases would undermine 
the protection of the Court proceedings. In the three rulings, the Court interpreted the exceptions 
set out in EU rules on access to documents in rela tion with other relevant provisions: rules on state-
aid, the Statute of the Court and the rules of proc edure as well as rules on protection of personal 
data. 
 
 
                                                 
89 ECJ, Case C-28/08P, Commission v The Bavarian Lager Co Ltd , 29.6.2010.  
90 Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to 
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, OJ L 145, 31.05.2001, p.43-48.  
91 R e g u l a t i o n  ( E C )  N o  4 5 / 2 0 0 1  o f  t h e  E u r o p e a n  P a r l i a m e n t  and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of 
individuals with regard to the processing  of personal data by the Community in stitutions and bodies and on the free 
movement of such data, OJ L 008, 12.01.2001, p. 1-22.  
92 ECJ, Case C-139/07P, Commission v Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH , 29.10.2010.  
93 ECJ, Joined cases C-514/07P, C-528/07P and C-532/07P, Commission/Association de la Presse internationale , 21.9.2010.  Right of access to clinical study reports on 
drugs 
Researchers wrote to the European Ombudsman 
that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) denied 
their request for access to clinical study reports for 
two anti-obesity drugs.  
The Ombudsman disagreed with EMA's 
assessment that the disclosure would undermine 
the drug producers' commercial interests and EMA then agreed to provide public access.  Right of access to data on absences on medical 
grounds by Members of the European Parliament 
A journalist wrote to the European Ombudsman 
regarding the refusal by the European Parliament to provide statistics on absences of Members of the 
European Parliament on medical grounds.  
The European Ombudsman consulted the 
European Data Protection Supervisor, who 
considered that individual Members of the 
European Parliament might be identified from the 
data requested.  
The Ombudsman concluded that if the European 
Parliament undertook this da ta processing, it would 
infringe the rules on data  protection and that the 
European Parliament was entitled to refuse the complainant's request. 
 
EN 47 Right to refer to the European Ombudsman  
The Charter provides that any EU citizen and any natural or legal person residing or having its 
registered office in a Member State, has the ri ght to refer to the European Ombudsman cases of 
maladministration in the activities of the EU in stitutions, bodies, offices and agencies, with the 
exception of the Court of Justice acting in its judicial role. In 2010, 2 667 individuals invoked their 
right to refer to the Ombudsman. 
In 2010, the European Ombudsman received a 
number of letters from citizens in relation to 
problems they encounter with the Member 
States. Complaints against public authorities of 
the Member States are not within the European 
Ombudsman’s mandate. The European 
Ombudsman co-operates with national and 
regional ombudsmen in the European Network 
of Ombudsmen to ensure that complaints are 
dealt with quickly and effectively. In a number 
of cases, the European Ombudsman transferred 
a complaint he had received, or advised the complainant to turn to, a member of the 
Network. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A complaint within the competence of the 
national ombudsperson 
A Czech living in Ireland and receiving jobseeker 
benefits got permission to travel to the Czech 
Republic to attend a course. While there, he sat for 
examinations on the day set for his return to 
Ireland. As a result of his delayed return, the Irish 
Department of Social Protection decided that he was not eligible for jobseeker benefits or even for a 
jobseeker allowance.  
The European Ombudsman transferred the 
complaint to the Irish Ombudsman, who drew 
attention to the relevant EU rules. Irish authorities 
reviewed its decision and paid the jobseeker 
benefits arrears for the period in question and until 
his entitlement ran out. They also promised to re-
examine his entitlement to a jobseeker allowance. 
 
EN 48 Freedom of movement and residence 
The Charter guarantees the right of every EU citizen to move and reside freely, in the respect of 
certain conditions, within the territory of the 
Member States. This fundamental right is also 
included in the Treaty on  the Functioning of the 
EU.94 The EU has adopted legislation that puts 
the freedom of movement and residence into practice. Member States must adapt national 
rules to this EU legislation and the Commission 
monitors whether they have done so. 
In 2010, the Commission undertook a structured 
dialogue with each Member State to examine 
their national rules an d to make sure these 
respect EU rules on freedom of movement and 
residence
95 adopted in 2004. The Commission 
also assisted the Member States in adapting 
their national legislations by conducting multilatera l meetings of experts to exchange views, know-
how and best practices, including on fighting against abuses and fraud regarding the right to free movement and residence. 
The Commission received a number of complaints rega rding the conditions of entry and residence of 
third-country family members of EU citizens. Ther efore, in order to assist Member States with 
adapting national legislation to EU  rules and, by the same token, to  ease the identification of the 
appropriate solutions to indi vidual cases in a consistent way, the Commission adopted a handbook 
for the implementation of the Schengen Visa Code
96 with a chapter dedicate d to processing of visa 
applications from family members of EU citizens.  
To improve knowledge of EU citizens' rights, the 
Commission also published a reader-friendly 
guide for EU citizens on freedom to move and 
live in Europe97. The web portal  Your Europe  
was also launched as a one-stop-shop to help 
EU citizens easily find information about their 
rights and to provide them with practical tips 
when moving around the European Union. 
In 2010, the Commission received requests 
regarding the blocking of the Greek port of 
Piraeus due to a strike. The Commission 
requested information from the Greek 
authorities as regards the industrial action and the way it was carried out. As the strike might 
have made it more difficult for EU tourists to 
reach their destinations, the blocking of the port 
raised concerns of compliance with EU law on 
free movement of EU citizens, goods and 
services. The Charter contains both the right to free movement for EU citizens and the right of 
workers and their organisations to take collective ac tion to defend their interests, including strike 
action. National authorities must ensure that exercise of one fundamental right does not restrict 
another fundamental right in an unjustified manner. To provide guidance in similar situations of port 
                                                 
94 Articles 20(2), 21 and 45 TFEU.  
95 Regulation (EEC) 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, OJ L 257, p. 2 and Directive 
2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union and their fam ily members to move and reside freely within the territory of 
the Member States, OJ L 158, p. 77.  
96 Decision establishing the Handbook for the processing of visa applications, 19 March 2010, COM(2010) 1620 final.  
97 Freedom to move and live in Europe – A Guide to  your rights as an EU citizen, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/ci tizenship/docs/guide_free_movement.pdf  Does a third-country national, who is married to an 
EU citizen, need a visa to travel to another Member State? 
An EU citizen lived in another Member State together 
with his wife, who is a third-country national. They wanted 
to go on holidays to another Member State and they 
wanted to know, if the wife would need a visa for this. 
Her residence card is sufficient. According to the Free 
Movement Directive, EU citi zens' family members holding 
a residence card do not need a visa to travel to another 
Member State in the Schen gen area. 
A permanent residence card for third-country 
nationals, who are married to EU citizens living in another Member State 
The Commission received a number of complaints by EU 
citizens who had been living for five years or more in 
another Member State with their spouse, a third country 
national. The EU citizen had already acquired the right of 
permanent residence in the host country, but the national 
authorities refused the right of permanent residence to 
the spouse. 
As the condition of five years of continuous residence 
with an EU citizen was fulfilled, following contacts between the Commission and the Member States, the 
national authorities issued  them with permanent 
residence cards.
 
EN 49 or border blockades, the EU adopted rules98 requiring the national authorities to determine whether 
a blockade may be an obstacle to free movement  and whether such an obstacle is justified and 
proportionate. In case of unjustified or disproport ionate restrictions, national authorities must take 
all necessary and proportionate measures to prevent any obstacles to free movement caused by the 
actions of private individuals.  
 
 
                                                 
98 Council Regulation (EC) No 2679/98 of 7 December 1998 on the functioning of the internal market in relation to the free 
movement of goods among the Member States, OJ L 337, 12.12.1998, p. 8-9.  
 
EN 50 Diplomatic and consular protection 
EU citizens travelling to a non-EU country in which their own co untry does not have an embassy or 
consulate have the right to turn for help to that of any other EU country and receive help under the 
same conditions as nationals of that country. 
Every day EU citizens travel on business or leisure  to countries outside the EU. More than 30 million 
EU citizens permanently live in non-EU countrie s. Sometimes EU citizens find themselves in a 
situation where they need assistance from an emba ssy or consulate. There are only three countries 
in the world where all Member States are represen ted: the United States, China and Russia. Several 
recent crises in non-EU countries directly affected  EU citizens in non-EU countries (e.g. Egypt, 
earthquakes in Haiti and Chile, volcanic ash cloud).  
The Charter guarantees the right of unrepresented EU citizens to seek diplomatic or consular 
protection from embassies or consulates of other Member States in third countries under the same 
conditions as nationals. EU citizens must be able  to rely effectively on this right when travelling 
abroad. One of the ways of making this right e ffective is through providing information to the 
officials in representations in non-EU co untries. In 2010, the Commission developed a training kit for 
consular officials  informing them about EU rules on consular protection .  
The Commission is building a website on consular protection  dedicated to the citizen, providing the 
addresses of all the available embassies/consulates in the world and travel advice from Member States. It is preparing a legislative proposal on coordination and cooperation measures  under the 
framework of the Lisbon Treaty to re nder this entitlement more effective. 
Union citizenship 
According to EU law99, every person holding the nationality of a Member State is a citizen of the 
Union. Citizenship of the Union is additional to national citizenship and does not replace it.  
Union citizenship does not compromise the 
principle of international law that States 
have the power to lay down the conditions for the acquisition and loss of nationality.  
The Court of Justice of the EU has confirmed 
this principle in its case law. The Court ruled 
that, when exercising their power regarding 
nationality, Member States must have due 
regard to EU law. In its judgment in the 
Rottmann case
100, the Court ruled that 
national rules on nationality, if they affect 
rights protected by EU rules, are open to judicial review in the light of EU law. It 
concluded that a decision on withdrawing 
naturalisation, which has as a cons equence not only loss of the nati onality of the Member State of 
naturalisation but also the loss of citizenship of th e Union, should be scru tinised by the national 
courts by reference to the principle of proportionality in the light of EU law.
101 
                                                 
99 Article 20(1) of the TFEU.  
100 ECJ, Case C-135/08, Rottman , 2.3.2010.  
101 The content and implications of this judgment are presente d in more detail in the Report under Article 25 On progress 
towards effective EU citizenship 2007-2010, COM(2010) 602 final, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/just ice/policies/citizenship/ docs/com_2010 _602_en.pdf Acquisition and loss of nationality 
A national of a non-EU country applied to obtain the 
nationality of a EU country, of which his father had been a 
national, but his application was rejected.  
The national authorities refused to exempt him from 
taking a language test despite his medically recognised 
disability.  
The Commission replied that it had no power to 
intervene in his case, explaining that each EU country is 
free to define the conditions for acquiring nationality and 
that it was for the national authorities to decide on his 
application in accordance with national law.  
 
EN 51 6. Justice 
 
 
  
 
   
 
   
 Right to an effective 
remedy and to a fair trial 
Presumption of 
innocence and right of defence
 
Principles of legality and proportionality of 
criminal offences and 
penalties
 
Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence
 Most letters, questions and petitions handled by the Commission in this area concerned 
access to justice.  
In 2010, key draft EU laws have been proposed or adopted to strengthen the right to a
fair trial wherever citizens are in the EU, to make it easier for international couples
wishing to divorce, and  to facilitate access to justice for businesses and consumers.  
 
EN 52 
 
Right to an effective remedy  
The Charter provides that when EU rules give a right to a person, he or she can 
go before a court in case this right is violated. This protection is called a right 
to an effective remedy , because it provides to individuals a legal solution 
decided by a tribunal when an authority used EU law in a wrong way. The right 
to effective remedy guarantees judicial protection against violations of any  EU rule which grants 
rights to people. It plays therefore a key role for ensuring the effectiveness of all EU law. 
In 2010, a number of judgements from the European Court referred to the right to effective 
remedy  in a variety of areas such as social policy102, telecommunication and consumer protection103, 
competition104, common foreign and security policy105 and legal aid106. 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
102 ECJ, Case C-243/09, Günter Fuß v Stadt Halle , 14.10.2010.  
103 ECJ, Joined Cases C-317/08, C-318/08, C-319/08 and C-320/08, Alassini and others , 18.3.2010.  
104 ECJ, Case C-407/08 P, Knauf Gips v European Commission , 1.7.2010.  
105 ECJ, Case T-49/07, Sofiane Fahas v Council , 7.12.2010.  
106 ECJ, Case C-279/09 DEB Deutsche Energiehandels- und Beratungsgesellschaft , 22.12.2010.  What does the right to an 
effective remedy mean in 
practice?  
The right to an effective remedy concerning 
legal aid  
A German company sued the German 
government for not implementing EU directives 
but was lacking funds to make the necessary 
advance payment of court costs and to hire a 
lawyer. DEB applied for legal aid in order to 
cover the costs, but it was refused because 
German law provided for a condition of public 
interest. 
The Court of Justice, in a ruling, stated that 
the principle of effective judicial protection 
applies also to companies seeking legal aid.  Dissatisfaction with national procedures 
In 2010, the Commission received a number of 
letters from the general public expressing 
dissatisfaction with proc edures before national 
authorities in areas outside EU law. 
The Commission explained that the right to an 
effective remedy only applies in situations, falling 
within EU competence. In cases, which fall outside 
EU law, the national authorities, including the 
courts, guarantee the right to an effective remedy 
in accordance with national rules.  
 
EN 53 When doing business, travelling or living in anot her Member State than their own, individuals or 
companies should not be discouraged from exerc ising their rights and should have appropriate 
access to justice . 
Under the current EU rules, a judgment given in one Member State does not 
automatically take effect in another Member State. In order to be enforced in 
another country, a court in that country first has to validate the decision and 
declare it enforceable. This is done in  a special procedure that takes place 
after the judgment has been obtained and before concrete measures of 
enforcement can be taken. This makes cross-
border litigation more cumbersome, time-
consuming and costly th an national litigation.  
In 2010, the Commission proposed107 to do 
away with unnecessary bureaucratic 
procedures , such as the intermediary court 
proceedings that are still needed before a 
judgement from one Member State is 
recognised in another, so as to ensure easier 
and more efficient access to justice. The 
abolition of the "exequatur" will lead to a 
situation where judgements issued in another 
Member State in civil and commercial matters will be treated like domestic judgements. The 
Commission also proposed to improve access 
to justice before the courts in Europe even 
when defendants are situated outside the 
Union. 
In 2010, the EU adopted a Commission regulation that defines which laws 
apply in cases of cross-border divorces
108, where partners come from different 
Member States. These rules aim at bringing legal certainty to international 
couples wishing to divorce . The new legislation will give a choice as to which country's rules apply in 
case of divorce for couples with different nationa lities, those living apart in different countries or 
those living together in a country other than their home country. Although this regulation does not directly concern access to justice, it can contribute to facilitating access to justice by improving legal 
certainty through defining which rules apply in such cases. This regulation aims to reduce "forum 
shopping" and to protect weaker partners during divorce disputes. Couples will be able to agree 
during the marriage which law would apply to their divorce. This will gi ve them more legal certainty, 
predictability and flexibility and will help to protec t spouses and their childre n from complicated and 
drawn-out procedures. International couples will have more control over their separation and 
protect weaker spouses from being put at an unfair disadvantage in divorce proceedings. Courts will 
have a common formula for deciding which country's law applies when couples cannot agree 
themselves. It has no effect on Member States' ability to define ma rriage. This regulation in limited 
situations permits Member States to disregard EU rules on divorce by quoting concerns regarding 
public order (exception of public order). In the application of rules on divorce, including the 
exception of public order, any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or 
social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any ot her opinion, membership 
of a national minority, property, birth, disability,  age or sexual orientation, shall be prohibited.  
                                                 
107 Proposal for a Regulation of the Europe an Parliament and of the Council on jurisdic tion and the recognition and enforcement 
of judgments in civil and commercial matters, COM/2010/748, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policie s/civil/docs/com_2010_748_en.pdf  
108 Council Regulation implementing enhanced c ooperation in the area of th e law applicable to divorce and legal separation, OJ L 
343, 29.12.2010, p. 10-16; this regulation however implements enhanced cooperation between Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, Austria, Port ugal, Romania and Slovenia a nd is therefore at present 
applicable only in those Member States, any other Member State having the possibility to join in at a later stage. How can citizens and 
businesses get court 
judgements recognised in 
other Member States?  
Legal action in national courts against a 
defendant located outside the EU  
A UK consumer signs a contract for a time-share 
apartment on the Turkish Rivier a while on holiday. He then 
returns home and decides that he cannot afford the 
apartment and decides to end the contract.  
Under the EU’s Time Share Directive, consumers can 
end contracts within 14 days. However, the Turkish seller 
refuses to reimburse the consumer. Under English law, no court in England has jurisdiction to hear the case. The 
consumer’s rights to be protected under the Time Share 
Directive are denied because of the lack of ju risdiction of 
English courts. The reformed "Brussels I" Regulation would 
give citizens and companies the same possibilities to sue in 
national courts when a defendant is located outside the 
EU.
What about cross-border divorces?  
 
EN 54 In order to put in practice the "right" to effective remedy, the Commission is 
developing a number of initiatives to facili tate the access to justice. To help EU 
citizens, in 2010 the Commission introduced the European e-Justice  Portal - a new 
direct service to citizens, accessible via the Eu ropean e-justice Portal. The Portal contains 
information that enables EU citizens to become mo re aware of their rights and help them to make 
use of those rights (legal aid, mediation, translation , etc.). In 2011, the Europe an e-Justice Portal will 
provide information on legal remedies in cases of alleged violations of fundamental rights. The EU 
also promotes training programmes on EU law for members of the judiciary in the EU ( European 
Judicial Training Network109). Members of the judiciary in Member States need to be familiar with 
EU rules, so they can apply them in concrete situations an d safeguard fundamental rights. 
 
Right to a fair trial and right of defence  
The right to a fair trial  guarantees that everyone is entitled to  a fair and public hearing, which must 
take place within a time frame by an independen t and impartial tribunal. When an individual is 
involved in criminal proceedings,  one of his fundamental rights is the guarantee of an independent 
and impartial tribunal. The right to a fair trial includes the right to a fair and public hearing within a 
reasonable time. Everyone is entitled to these righ ts, regardless of his nation ality or what language 
they speak. The Charter also guarantees respect for the rights to a defence  of anyone who has been 
charged. It guarantees in particular that the su spect understands the criminal proceedings against 
him, if he or she does not speak the language of the procedure.  
To put these rights into practice, the EU is adopting common minimum 
standards in criminal procedure, taking into account the differences among 
Member States in the area of criminal law. In 2010 the EU  adopted rules on 
the right to interpretation and to translation in criminal proceedings .110  
These rules aim to improve the rights of  suspects and accused persons who do 
not understand or speak the language of the proceedings. They provide common minimum 
standards throughout the EU. The rules grant suspec ts the right to interpretation during criminal 
proceedings. They also grant suspects the right to be provided with written translations of all 
documents which are essential to defend themse lves and to safeguard the fairness of the 
proceedings. Essential documents include dec isions depriving a person  of his liberty, the 
charge/indictment and any judgme nt. The Commission's proposal was brought in parallel to an 
                                                 
109 Available at: http://www.ejtn.net/en/  
110 Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Par liament and of the Council of 20 October 2 010 on the right to interpretation and 
translation in criminal proceeding s, OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p. 1–7.  How can access to 
justice be put into 
practice?  
How to reinforce the right 
to a fair trial and the right 
of defence?  
 
EN 55 initiative tabled by a group of Member States. As the Commission's proposal was more ambitious, 
these elements were in the end in tegrated in the adopted proposal. 
Suspects in criminal proceedings mu s t  k n o w  w h a t  t h e i r  r i g h t s  a r e  i n  o r d e r  t o  b e  a b l e  t o  e x e r c i s e  
them. For this reason, in 2010 the Co mmission proposed rules requiring that suspects of a criminal 
offence  must be informed of their rights  in a language they understand .111 Anyone arrested either 
for a criminal offence or under a European Arrest  Warrant must be informed in writing, in a 
document called a Letter of Rights , of their basic rights at the time of arrest and of what they are 
suspected. The Commission's proposal provides a mode l in all official EU languages. This will provide 
consistency for people crossing borders and limit translation cost s as each Member State may use 
the Commission model. 
The Commission is working on a third measure, on access to a lawyer , and undertook an extensive 
consultation exercise in the last part of 2010. 
 
 
                                                 
111 Proposal for a Directive on the right to information in criminal proceedings, COM(2010) 392/3, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/news/i ntro/doc/com_2010_392_3_en.pdf