No C 71/2 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 3. 89 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) amending Regulation (EEC) 
No 797/85 with regard to the extensification of production 
(89/C 71/02) 
On 27 December 1988, the Council decided to exercise its option to consult the Economic 
and Social Committee, in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Economic and Social Committee decided to appoint Mr Luchetti rapporteur-general 
with the task of preparing its work on the subject. 
At its 262nd plenary session (meeting of 25 January) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion with no dissenting votes and one abstention. 
The Committee approves the proposal that mandatory application of the extensification 
scheme be deferred until 31 December 1989. Member States will be able to learn from regional 
and local pilot schemes in the course of 1989, and will then be better placed to adopt the 
technical and administrative procedures required to implement the measures laid down in 
the Regulations on the improvement of the efficiency of agricultural structures and the set-
aside of arable land. 
Done at Brussels, 25 January 1989. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONK 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive on voting rights for Community nationals 
in local elections in their Member State of residence (') 
(89/C 71/03) 
On 8 July 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee (ESC), 
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 12 January 1989. 
The rapporteur was Mr Vercellino. 
At its 262nd plenary session (meeting of 25 January 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by 126 votes in favour, with 4 dissenting votes and 
9 abstentions. 
The Committee approves the Commission's proposed 
Directive but would make the following comments and 
proposals, with the sole aim of facilitating the adoption 
and implementation of the Directive in the light of 
experience gained in this field in some countries and in 
anticipation of the difficulties some Member States may 
encounter in applying the Directive. Appended to the 
Opinion is a chart summarizing the position in the 
(') OJ No C 246, 20. 9. 1988, p. 3. various Member States as regards the right to vote in 
local elections. 
1. General comments 
1.1. Nature and scale of the present problem 
After a long period of research and preparatory work, 
the Commission has put forward a proposal for a 
Directive to guarantee the right to vote in local elections 
for EEC nationals resident in a Member State other 
than that of their origin. 
20. 3. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 71/3 
This idea has already been mooted in the 1976 Com­
munity action programme for migrant workers and 
their families (OJ No C 34, 14. 2. 1976). It was based 
on the statement made in the Council of Ministers, 
when Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 was adopted on 
15 October 1968 (OJ No L 257, 19. 18. 1968), to the 
effect that for freedom of movement to be exercised by 
objective standards, equal opportunities would have to 
be guaranteed in fact and in law to facilitate better 
integration into the host country. 
The proposed Directive should therefore be seen not 
only as a measure needed to allow millions of citizens 
living in another Member State to vote—a right which 
they are at present denied—but also as the endorsement 
of a long-standing commitment and a significant 
attempt to: 
— overcome remaining obstacles to the free movement 
of people and create a European area with no inter­
nal frontiers, 
— complete the single market by 1992 and build a 
People's Europe, 
— promote the respect and full exercise of the demo­
cratic rights which the Member States pledged to 
uphold in the Single Act, 
— more generally, to make for wider participation by 
citizens and nations in a swifter and more balanced 
process of economic, social, democratic and cultural 
growth in the Community and Member States. 
1.2. Legal basis of the Directive 
The Committee, which already expressed its support 
for the recognition and the guarantee of this right some 
years ago, welcomes the Commission's determination 
to solve this complex and delicate problem and 
acknowledges that the Commission is acting within its 
mandate. It endorses the guidelines, main objectives 
and legal basis (Art. 235 (3) (c) 8 A of the Treaty) of 
the proposed Directive, and the urgent need to approve 
and implement it by 1992. 
1.3. Debates, surveys and initiatives in Europe—Con­
tributions by the ESC and the European Parlia­
ment 
The Committee warmly congratulates the Commission 
on the fact that its Directive takes account of and stems 
from the debates which have taken place in Europe, 
the practical experiments already carried out in some 
countries and the repeated requests issued in the sevent­
ies and eighties by a wide range of social and political interest groups and organizations, notably the Euro­
pean Parliament (June 1983—May and November 
1985—December 1987) and the Economic and Social 
Committee. 
On all these occasions the Committee expressed support 
for a five-year minimum period of residence if people 
were to be able to vote in local elections in another 
Member State (see Opinions CES 984/84 of 25 October 
1984 and CES 470/85 of 29 May 1985), stressing that 
'economic rationale (free movements of goods and capi­
tal) will have to be accompanied by parallel legal, 
social and political considerations for the Community's 
citizens' (CES 213/88 of 25 February 1988). 
1.4. Taking stock: The lessons to be learned from 
initial experience 
The contributions and experiences of some Member 
States (the Netherlands, Denmark and Ireland) which 
have already granted the right to vote in local elections 
to nationals of other Member States and non-EEC 
countries are invaluable: results have been positive and 
encouraging. 
An examination of the initial findings, in addition to 
highlighting existing difficulties and demonstrating the 
usefulness and feasibility of the initiative, reveals, inter 
alia, that: 
— allowing immigrants to vote in local elections has 
not only helped them to integrate better into the 
local community, but has also made electoral autho­
rities and groupings more aware of the problems 
which they face, 
— to achieve positive results, not only does the ground 
have to be properly prepared for implementing the 
Directive and relevant national provisions, but also 
full account has to be taken of specific local and 
national features and difficulties, by introducing 
appropriate information campaigns and adminis­
trative measures, 
— support measures and media campaigns are 
extremely useful in creating the right kind of climate 
for encouraging the various national, ethnic and 
cultural groups to join forces and play a more active 
part in their local community and in the social and 
democratic life of the EEC and Member States. 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. Freedom of choice but no obligations or dual 
votes 
The Committee fully agrees with the crux of the Direc­
tive which, from a legal, social and political viewpoint, 
No C 71/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 3. 89 
considers that voting in local elections in the country 
of residence is an incontrovertible right and a question 
of freedom of choice for the citizen, and not an obli­
gation or imposition (in full compliance with obli­
gations arising from national and local laws and pro­
visions in the country of residence). It also agrees that 
the right to vote in local elections cannot be simul­
taneously exercised in two different municipalities or 
Member States. 
2.2. Top priority: Rapid implementation of the Direc­
tive 
The Committee vehemently stresses that maximum pri­
ority should go to rapidly approving and implementing 
the Directive on voting rights in local elections by 1992. 
Without wishing to underestimate the importance of 
the factors which lie behind some of the Directive's 
provisions, and whilst it recognizes that they generally 
consist of options open to Member States (as opposed 
to obligations), the Committee is nevertheless baffled by 
certain provisions, conditions, deadlines and optional 
exemptions contained in some articles and in the tran­
sitional and final provisions of the Directive. 
The Committee therefore recommends that all due 
attention be given to the following comments and 
suggestions so that certain aspects of the Directive, on 
which the Member States and the Council of Ministers 
can reach a rapid consensus, can be amended without 
delaying its introduction. Other amendments could be 
made later or could be considered by the Member 
States, possibly before the Directive has finally come 
into force, or during the initial phase of application. 
2.3. Adaptation of national laws 
Some of the electoral laws and provisions in force in 
certain Member States, including those preventing their 
own nationals from voting in another Member State, 
will have to be brought into step with the Directive so 
as to guarantee the freedom to vote in local elections. 
The deadline for the Directive's entry into force allows 
Member States sufficient time to amend articles of their 
constitutions which may be incompatible. Should this 
deadline prove to be too short, however, the principle 
of the primacy of Community law over national law, 
including constitutions, a principle which has been 
upheld by the Court of Justice, could justify a pro­
visional adjustment. At the same time as reconciling 
Community and national interests, this would allow 
for the non-application of unamended constitutions and 
for the application of the Directive within the prescribed deadline, on the basis of the Internationale Handelsge-
sellschaft judgment which stipulates that 'the validity 
of a Community measure or its effect within a Member 
State cannot be affected by allegations that it runs 
counter to .... the principles of its constitutional struc­
ture'^) and the Costa v Enel judgment (2), confirmed 
in 1978 in the Simmenthal judgment (3). 
2.4. Length of residence 
The Committee agrees with the period of residence 
required (this should not exceed the duration of an 
electoral term of office) in order to exercise the right 
to vote. To avoid differing interpretations and misun­
derstandings as regards the length of residence required 
in order to be registered on the electoral roll, however, 
the second paragraph of Article 4 should specify that 
continuous residence may be certified by any procedure 
or document in use or recognized as being valid in the 
Member State of residence; that the period of residence 
prior to the entry into force of the Directive may also 
be included; and that the total period of residence may 
not be invalidated by temporary or longer periods of 
absence which do not entail a change in the place of 
residence. 
2.5. The right to stand for election 
Article 8 of the Directive stipulates a period of residence 
in order to stand for election which is twice as long as 
that required in order to obtain the right to vote in 
local elections. In the light of experience and of surveys 
carried out in various countries, the Committee feels 
that this longer period of residence unnecessarily com­
plicates matters and that it should be reduced to the 
equivalent of one term of office, as is required in order 
to vote. This would also prevent excessive penalization 
of persons changing their place of residence from one 
Member State to another, as well as safeguarding free­
dom of movement of individuals, one term of office 
allowing plenty of time in wich to integrate into the 
local municipality and become familiar with its chief 
(*) Judgment of 17 December 1970; Case 11/70. ECR 1125. 
(2) Judgment of 15 July 1964; Case 6/64. ECR 1141. 
(3) Judgment of 19 March 1978; Case 106/77. ECR 629. This 
judgment states that: 'A national court which is called upon, 
within the limits of its jurisdiction, to apply provisions of 
Community law is under a duty to give full effect to those 
provisions, if necessary withdrawing its own motion to apply 
any conflicting provision of national legislation, even if adopt­
ed subsequently, and it is not necessary for the court to 
request or await the prior setting aside of such provisions by 
legislative or other constitutional means.' 
20. 3. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 71/5 
problems. Indeed, 'the right to stand for election' is 
generally assumed to be based on 'the right to vote'. A 
period of residence equivalent to two terms of office in 
order to stand for election would also further compli­
cate the local authorities' already time-consuming task 
of updating the electoral roll. 
2.6. Municipal posts and indirect elections 
Irrespective of the content of the Directive and of 
national laws, serious consideration should be given to 
the possibility of allowing citizens of other Member 
States who have been elected as municipal councillors 
to take up municipal or lower level posts, particularly 
in countries where they are, or might be, deprived of 
this right. We should draw on the experience of Member 
States where such restrictions do not exist. 
2.7. The possibility of deferring implementation of the 
Directive 
The Committee feels that the possibility of waiving 
application of the Directive or applying it gradually, as 
provided for in Articles 11 and 12, should be used with 
the utmost caution and as sparingly as possible by the 
Member States, as this could delay by many years the 
implementation of the Directive. 
With regard to the option of waiving application of the 
Directive according to the proportion of nationals of 
other Member States (Art. 11) in the total population, 
it would be preferable to take account also of the 
number of citizens of other Member States who have 
the right to vote (having completed the required period 
of residence) and have chosen to vote in the Member 
State and municipality of residence, in relation to the 
number of nationals of the Member State of residence 
who are registered on the electoral rolls. Furthermore, 
the wording of this article should be revised as it is too 
vague in its present format, does not lay down any 
deadline for derogations and could give rise to discrimi­
nation between EEC Member States and citizens. 
2.8. Limiting the number of municipal councillors 
With respect to Article 12, which limits the number of 
nationals of other Member States allowed to sit on a 
municipal council, it should be borne in mind that a 
measure of this kind will also penalize nationals intend­
ing to vote for candidates who are citizens of other 
Member States, in violation of existing laws. It should 
also be remembered that in countries where elections 
for municipal councillors also consist of indirect elec­
tions for members of parliament, recourse to Article 12 could be in violation of Article 3 of the protocol 
appended to the European Convention on Human 
rights. 
Recourse to both Articles 11 and 12 could excessively 
delay application of the Directive, possibly by as much 
as 25 years, given that there is a three-year transitional 
period before it comes into force. 
2.9. Report on implementation of the Directive 
The report mentioned in Article 13 of the proposal 
should also be forwarded to the Economic and Social 
Committee. 
3. Final considerations 
In line with the publication and implementation of the 
Directive on the right to vote in local elections, the 
Committee would also urge the Commission, Council 
and Member States to take action to solve, with all 
possible speed, a number of similar problems, both 
general and particular, which have been left hanging in 
the balance and are connected with the prospective 
right to vote in European elections and with the con­
struction of a People's Europe. 
3.1. A People's Europe 
To achieve this, a swift solution should be found to 
major problems such as: the participation of EEC citi­
zens in intermediate elections (local constituency, prov­
ince, region, etc.); the creation of a Community citizen­
ship, to be clearly defined and independent of national­
ity; and the translation of Article 138 of the Treaty 
into an appropriate instrument providing a standard 
procedure for elections to the European Parliament, 
based on the active and passive right to vote in Euro­
pean elections in the country of residence. 
3.2. Family members, refugees and stateless persons 
Another issue which should be tackled here is that of 
extending the right to vote in local elections to family 
members (older and younger dependents) in accordance 
with the definitions contained in Article 10 of Regu­
lation (EEC) No 1612/68, and to refugees and stateless 
persons resident in the Member States. 
3.3. Citizens of non-EEC countries 
The precarious civil and legal position of many citizens 
and immigrants from non-EEC countries is a highly 
topical issue, and one which will become even more so 
No C 71/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 3. 89 
possibility of extending to non-EEC citizens the right 
to vote in local elections (*) where this is not already 
the case. 
(') The European Parliament has already adopted a similar 
stance, requesting that these citizens also be allowed to vote 
in local elections (OJ No C 13, 18. 1. 1988). 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
APPENDIX 1 
Voting rights in local elections in the Member States 
I. Countries which grant voting rights to all non-nationals: 
1. DENMARK 
A: Danish nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in Denmark. 
B: All foreign nationals resident in Denmark have been entitled to vote in local elections since 1981. 
2. IRELAND 
A: Irish nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in Ireland. 
B: All foreign nationals resident in Ireland are entitled to vote in local elections. 
3. THE NETHERLANDS 
A: Dutch nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in the Netherlands. 
B: All foreign nationals resident in the Netherlands have been entitled to vote in local elections since 1983. 
II. Countries which grant voting rights to certain categories of non-nationals: 
1. UNITED KINGDOM 
A: UK nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in the United Kingdom. 
B: Only Irish and Commonwealth citizens are entitled to vote in local elections in the United Kingdom. 
2. PORTUGAL 
A: Portuguese nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in Portugal. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Portugal are not entitled to vote in local elections, which are restricted to 
Portuguese nationals by the Constitution (exception made in the case of nationals of Portuguese-speaking 
countries which grant reciprocal rights). under a People's Europe. In the light of the comments 
made in paragraph 1.4, the Section would, in the inter­
ests of consistency and to avoid alienation, rifts and 
tension between citizens and workers of different 
nationalities, advise the Commission, Council and 
Member States, in due course and in the light of experi­
ence already gained in some countries, to look into the 
Done at Brussels, 25 January 1989. 
20. 3. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 71/7 
III. Countries which do not grant voting rights to non-nationals: 
1. BELGIUM 
A: Belgian nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in Belgium. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Belgium are not entitled to vote in local elections, which are restricted to 
Belgian nationals by the Constitution. 
2. GERMANY 
A: German nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in Germany. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Germany are not entitled to vote in local elections, which are restricted to 
the 'People'—interpreted as the German people—by the Basic Constitutional Law. 
3. GREECE 
A: Greek nationals retain their right to vote in local elections in Greece if they return to cast their vote in 
person. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Greece are not entitled to vote in local elections, which are restricted to 
Greek nationals by the Constitution. 
4. SPAIN 
A: Spanish nationals resident abroad retain their right to vote in local elections in Spain, and they may also 
vote by post or by proxy. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Spain are not entitled to vote in local elections, although the Constitution 
provides that this right may be granted by law on a reciprocal basis. 
5. FRANCE 
A: French nationals resident abroad retain their right to vote in local elections in France and they may also 
vote by proxy. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in France are not entitled to vote in local elections which are restricted to 
French nationals by the Constitution. 
6. ITALY 
A: Italian nationals retain their right to vote in local elections in Italy provided they return to vote in person. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Italy are not entitled to vote in local elections, which are restricted to Italian 
nationals by the Constitution. 
7. LUXEMBOURG 
A: Luxembourg nationals resident abroad lose their right to vote in local elections in Luxembourg. 
B: Foreign nationals resident in Luxembourg are not entitled to vote in local elections, which are restricted 
to Luxembourg nationals by the Constitution. 
Rules in force in the countries granting voting rights to all non-nationals: 
1. DENMARK 
Conditions (right to vote and stand for election): 
— minimum age 18 years, „ 
— residence in the local authority area in question, 
— residence in Denmark during the three years immediately preceding the elections in question. 
No C 71/8 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 3. 89 
2. IRELAND 
Conditions (right to vote and stand for election): 
— minimum age 18 years, 
— residence in the local authority area in question, 
— residence in Ireland for six months before the elections in question. 
3. THE NETHERLANDS 
Conditions (right to vote and stand for election): 
— minimum age 18 years, 
— residence in the local authority area in question, 
— lawful settlement in The Netherlands for a minimum of five years before the elections in question. 
APPENDIX 2 
Defeated amendment 
The following amendment, which received at least one quarter of the total votes cast, was defeated during 
the debate: 
Add a new paragraph 2.3: 
'A specific problem with regard to the implementation of the proposals does, however, arise in the case of 
Member States having a particularly high percentage of foreign residents who are nationals of other EC 
States. Under the right of eligibility, these foreign residents could secure the leading role in the running of a 
local community. This problem is well illustrated by the case of Luxembourg, whose population comprises 
over 27 % foreign residents and in some districts the figure even exceeds 50 %. 
In such cases provision should therefore be made for the gradual adaptation of the electoral law with the 
possibility of establishing, for example, a separate consultative college for foreign representatives at local 
level.' 
Reasons 
Self explanatory. 
Result of voting 
For: 34, against: 75, abstentions: 20.