COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 07.01.1998 
COM(97) 731 final 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE 
COUNCIL ON THE APPLICATION OF DIRECTIVE 93/109/EC 
Voting rights of EU citizens living in a Member State of which they are not nationals 
in European Parliament elections 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
Council Directive 93/109/EC was applied by all the Member States to the June 
1994 EP elections. Sweden, Austria and Finland also applied it to their first EP 
elections held in the course of 1995 and 1996. On this basis, circa 4.471.647 eligible 
Union citizens resident in a Member State of which they are not nationals were able 
take to part in the elections in their Member State of residence, if they so wished. 
A low turnout 
However, the results of the June 1994 election highlighted two shortcomings in the 
participation of non-national Union citizens. First and foremost there was a lack of 
information about the new rights. Secondly there was a dramatically low rate of 
successful non-national candidates. Participation of non-national voters in the 
Member State of residence varied between 44.11% in Ireland where this right had 
been available since 1979, to 1.55% in Greece. The aggregate turnout of non-national 
Union citizens in the Fifteen was of about 5.87%. Only one non-national candidate 
was elected in her Member State of residence. These figures should be considered 
alongside the continuing steady decline in national voter participation in European 
Parliament elections, from 63.0% in 1979 to 56.5% in 1994. 
Implementation 
The Commission has completed the analysis of the implementation laws and 
concluded that on the whole the directive was satisfactorily implemented by Member 
States. At the Commission's request a number of minor adjustments to the 
implementation laws have been carried out by the Member States. Considering the 
most recent population figures, the derogation awarded to Luxembourg with regard to 
a minimum residence period should be confirmed for the next European Parliament 
elections. 
On the basis of that analysis, the Commission submits that at this stage, the 
Directive itself does not need to be changed. This being said, the Commission 
considers that improvements in its application should be carried out by Member States 
specifically with regards to Articles 12 and 13, with a view to increase participation of 
non-national voters and candidates and to fine tune the mechanism for the exchange 
of information between the Member States on EU citizens wishing to vote in their 
Member State of residence: 
Information campaign 
Member States should substantially increase their efforts to inform their non-
national EU residents as provided by Article 12 of the Directive. This is particularly 
the case for those Member States that do not contact their EU citizens individually 
and make use of administrative posting only. 
1 
For its part the Commission, together with the European Parliament, will continue 
to provide detailed information on how electoral rights should be exercised building 
on the Citizens First information initiative and the oncoming Citizens Dialogue. 
The exchange of information 
In order to curb the double vote, Article 13 requires Member States to exchange 
information about their nationals voting in their Member State of residence. The 
Commission submits that substantial improvements in the application of the current 
provisions should be carried out. 
In order to achieve this the Commission's services are presently working with 
Member States in order to improve administrative co-operation. The objective is to 
find a reliable, flexible and cost-effective way which will enable Member States to 
exchange information about their nationals voting in the Member State of residence, 
in time to introduce modifications to their electoral rolls and in the respect of the rules 
on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data. 
The participation in the political process prior to elections 
Although not foreseen by a specific provision of the directive, in order to ensure 
that the right to stand as a candidate is more widely enjoyed by non-national EU, it 
appears important to facilitate their participation in the political life of their Member 
State of residence. 
The role of political parties, both at national and European level is of course 
paramount towards the achievement of this goal. But efforts should also be deployed 
at national level to remove any potential obstacles to the political activity of Union 
citizens. 
The Commission for its part will fulfil its role as guardian of the Treaty and take 
all the necessary steps towards ensuring that discrimination on the basis of nationality 
does not hinder Union citizens from presenting their candidature. 
4<x 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Introduction 
1. The situation prior to the entry into force of the Directive 
2. The scope of Article 8B(2) CE and the objectives of Directive 93/109 
Chapter I : THE JUNE 1994 ELECTIONS 
3. The information campaign 
3.1 The duty to inform 
3.2 The implementation 
3.3 The role of the European institutions 
4. Who is entitled to participate and the conditions for the exercise of these 
rights 
4.1 Entry into the electoral roll 
4.2 Maintenance in the electoral roll 
4.3 The disqualification rule 
CHAPTER II : EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE 
5. The participation of non-national voters and candidates 
6. Reasons for low turnout 
7. The exchange of information between Member States 
8. Derogations and transitional provisions 
CHAPTER III: CONCLUSIONS 
9. Suggested improvements to the application of the directive 
INTRODUCTION 
Voting rights in European Parliament elections and in local elections in the 
Member State of residence are one of the most important new entitlements conferred 
on all nationals of the Member States by the Treaty of Maastricht. Taking part, in the 
democratic process of the host Member State on an equal footing as nationals not only 
embodies the idea of a citizenship of the Union as a set of common values shared by 
all but it also strengthens, on an individual basis the integration of the Union citizen in 
the host Member State1. 
The first application of these new rights, to the June 1994 European Parliament 
elections enabled circa 4.471.647 eligible Union citizens resident in a Member State 
other than their own to take part in the elections, if they so wished. Those residing in 
the three new Member States soon followed suit as the first ever European Parliament 
elections were held on 17 September 1995 in Sweden and on 13 and 20 October 1996 
in Austria and Finland. 
Objective of the present report is to evaluate the application of Council Directive 
93/109/EC of 6 December 1993 which lays down detailed arrangements for the 
exercise of the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in European Parliament 
elections for Union citizens resident in a Member State of which they are not 
nationals2. 
It briefly explains the main principles behind the directive and relates on the 
procedures applicable in the Fifteen on the basis of which non-national residents were 
able to participate in the elections. It analyses how the implementation laws interacted 
with national legislation in the respect of the principle of non-discrimination. Finally 
it evaluates how the electorate responded and explores avenues of improvement in the 
application of the Directive. 
The Commission would like to take this opportunity to thank Member States for 
providing information for the presentation of this report. During the course of 1995, 
two meetings with experts of the Member States were held under the auspices of the 
Commission and bilateral contacts continued during the course of 1996. The contents 
of the six tables annexed to this report have been reviewed by the Member States. 
1. The situation prior to the entry into force of the Directive 
Before the introduction of the directive most Member States allowed their 
expatriate citizens to vote in European Parliament elections through proxy or at 
consulates and embassies whilst voting rights were extended to non-nationals EU 
citizens in four Member States only. 
Cf. 2nd Report of the Commission on citizenship of the Union, COM (97) 230 of 27 May 
1997 
OJ L 329/34 of 30.12.1993. Article 16 of the Directive provides for the Commission to 
submit a report by 31 December 1995 on the June 1994 EP elections only. But in order to 
allow for a global evaluation of the application of the Directive including in the three new 
Member States, the presentation of the report was postponed. 
In Ireland, nationals of another Member State have been able to vote since the first 
elections by direct universal suffrage of 1979. The Netherlands granted the right to 
vote to its non-national *EU residents who had lost their voting rights due to residence 
abroad. In Belgium, nationals of other Member States could vote provided that they 
had been in the population register for at least three years and had lost their voting 
rights in their home Member State on account of their residence in Belgium. Lastly, 
all Irish nationals and Commonwealth citizens had the right to vote in the United 
Kingdom. 
As far as the right to stand as a candidate was concerned, prior to the Directive 
only two Member States allowed non-nationals to stand as candidates in their 
territory. Italy welcomed nationals of all Member States to stand for election 
regardless of their residence since 1979 and the United Kingdom allows Irish 
nationals to stand as candidates. 
2. The scope of Article 8B (2) of the EC Treaty and the objectives set out in 
Directive 93/109 
In granting the right to vote and to stand as a candidate to Union citizens resident 
in another Member State, Article 8 B of the EC Treaty does not seek to harmonise 
electoral laws of the Member States but merely to eliminate the nationality condition 
which, in most cases, meant that Union citizens did not enjoy electoral rights outside 
their own Member State. 
Similarly, its provisions and implementation are without prejudice to the uniform 
electoral procedure provided for in Article 138 (3) of the EC Treaty. Article 8B is 
concerned exclusively with extending electoral rights to Union citizens resident in 
another Member State, under the same conditions as nationals of that State, whereas 
Article 138 (3) aims to introduce, throughout the Union, a set of common rules on the 
basis of which EP elections are to be held. These concern, for instance, the voting 
system, the scrutiny of members' credentials, the rules on incompatibility, the 
allocation of seats and other matters. 
Existing electoral rights are also unaffected by the provisions of Article 8B (2). 
Members States retain their competence to maintain or grant electoral rights to third 
country nationals residing in their territory. Similarly, the rules governing the 
exercise of voting rights by expatriate Union citizens in favour of their own national 
candidates through embassies, consulates or by proxy, are expressly outside the scope 
of the Directive. 
In pursuing the aims set out by Article 8B (2), Directive 93/109 laid down the 
principles under which EU citizens resident in another Member State may exercise 
their rights in their Member State of residence provided that they fulfil the 
conditions imposed by the electoral law of that Member State with regard to its own 
nationals. These principles are: 
• The freedom of choice - Union citizens are free to choose whether to exercise 
their rights in their Member State of origin or in that of residence. 
• A single vote and a single candidature - No one may vote or stand as a 
candidate in more than one Member State in the same EP election. By opting to vote 
or to stand in one Member State, the EU citizen automatically loses the same right in 
the other Member State. In order to avoid double voting and double candidature, 
Member States exchange information on citizens exercising their rights abroad. 
• First entry into the electoral roll in the Member State of residence by 
application only - EU citizens wishing to exercise their franchise in their Member 
State of residence must apply to be entered on the electoral roll. 
• Equal access to electoral rights - On the basis of the principle of non 
discrimination EU citizens aie to benefit from electoral rights under the same 
conditions as nationals of the State of residence. This includes, for example, access to 
the same appeal procedures with regard to omission or errors in the electoral roll or in 
the application to stand as a candidate or an obligation to vote extended to registered 
non-nationals. Similarly, once on the electoral roll, the EU citizen remains on it under 
the same conditions as nationals or until he/she requests to be removed. 
• Extra territorial effect of the rules of disqualification of candidates - No one 
deprived of the right to stand as a candidate in his/her Member State of origin may be 
elected to the European Parliament in his/her Member State of residence. 
• A duty to inform - In order to ensure that Community voters living in a Member 
State other than their own are made aware of their new entitlements, the Directive 
imposes an obligation on the Member State of residence to inform its Community 
residents, "in good time and in an appropriate manner" of the ways in which their 
rights may be exercised 
• Derogations only if warranted by a specific situation in a Member State -
Article 8B exceptionally allows for derogations to the principle of equal treatment to 
be introduced where warranted by the specific situation in a Member State. The 
Directive contains two derogations. The first one relates to minimum residence 
requirements that may be imposed on non-nationals by those Member States whose 
proportion of non-national EU citizens exceeds 20% of enfranchised Union citizens. 
The second one concerns those Member States in which EU residents have already 
taken part in national elections and to that effect were entered on the electoral roll 
under exactly the same conditions as nationals. The Directive allows these Member 
States to refrain from applying some of its provisions in respect of such nationals. 
• Transitional provisions applicable only to the June 1994 elections: The four 
transitional provisions concern the formalities required for entry into the electoral roll 
and the presentation of candidatures already underway in some Member States at the 
time of the adoption of the Directive. Their insertion was dictated by the need to cope 
with the limited time available between the adoption of the Directive and the holding 
of the 4,h direct elections to the European Parliament. 
CHAPTER I: THE JUNE 1994 ELECTIONS 
National rules prevail 
Pending the adoption of a uniform electoral procedure, European Parliament 
elections are governed by national legislation, by the 1976 Act concerning the 
elections of the representatives of the European Parliament by direct universal 
suffrage3 and finally by the provisions of Article 8B (2) and by those of directive 
109/93 which implements them. 
The 1994 elections to the European Parliament were held on 9 June in Denmark, 
Ireland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom and on 12 June in Belgium, Greece, 
Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Luxembourg and Portugal. 
The Accession Act provided for the new Member States to hold their first 
European Parliament elections by direct universal suffrage within the first two years 
following accession4. Sweden chose to elect its representatives on 17 September 1995 
whereas Austria and Finland held their first EP elections in the course of 1996, 
namely on the 13th and 20th October respectively. 
All twelve Member States implemented the provisions of Directive 93/109 within 
the prescribed deadline and in time for the June 1994 elections. The three new 
Member States adopted the necessary provisions by 1996 and applied them in their 
first EP elections. Detailed references to all implementation laws may be found in 
Table 6, annexed. 
3. The information campaign 
3.1 A duty to inform 
The obligation set out in Article 12 of the Directive to inform EU citizens in good 
time and in an appropriate manner, leaves Member States free to decide how to carry 
out the information campaign. The objective is of course to mobilise expatriates 
sufficiently in advance in order to allow them to request their entry into the electoral 
roll or, in the case of candidates, to allow them to fulfil the necessary requirements to 
present their candidature. 
The need for an effective information campaign was underlined from the outset by 
the European Parliament whose members adopted resolutions calling for an 
appropriate information campaign and for "...Union citizens to be informed on the 
same basis as nationals of the Member States and in particular to receive letters of 
notification addressed to them in person ..."5. Throughout the period of 
3 OJL 278 of 8.10.1976 
4 Art 31 ( 1) and (2) of the Act of Accession in OJC241/27 of 29.8.1994 
5 Resolution B3-0064/94of 20 January 1994 on Voting Rights for citizens of the Union in 
implementation a number of petitions and written and oral questions were presented 
by MEPs focusing on the access of non-nationals to their new rights and notably their 
right to be informed. 
3.2 Its implementation 
Generally speaking, for the June 1994 EP election, Member States chose one of 
two approaches : To carry out an information campaign addressed to the public in 
general or to forward individual letters to registered Union citizens. 
In the first category were Belgium, France, Spain, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, 
Portugal, Austria and the United Kingdom. In these Member States, an information 
campaign was initiated by the central government but the final responsibility for 
relaying the information to the general public was left to local authorities. In some of 
these Member States these authorities took it upon themselves to address voters 
personally through direct mailing. This was the case for instance in some 
municipalities of Belgium and in some German Lander. 
Table 1 indicates by Member State, the measures adopted to inform the public. 
They ranged from press releases and the distribution of leaflets in various languages 
to compulsory posting ofpublic notices. Throughout the Union television appears to 
have played a minor role in diffusing the information. 
Other Member States adopted the second approach and informed registered 
Community voters of their rights through direct mailing. This was the case in 
Luxembourg where an information leaflet was published in 5 languages and 
forwarded to all residents. In Denmark, Sweden and Finland individual letters 
containing a brief explanation of the new rights as well as an application to vote were 
addressed to all eligible EU residents three to six months before polling day. In 
Northern Ireland an information leaflet was distributed to every household. Finally, 
the Netherlands, in accordance with Article 15 c of the Directive, forwarded a letter 
informing all registered EU citizens that they would be entered on the Dutch electoral 
roll unless they specifically opted to vote in their Member State of origin. 
Private associations and businesses also contributed on a voluntary basis to relay 
the information to the public. Such campaigns were carried out in Belgium, Spain, 
France, Germany, Luxembourg where migrant organisations were particularly active. 
In the course of the evaluation meetings of experts of the Commission and the 
Member States it emerged that there was awareness of the advantages of addressing 
information directly to EU citizens. Two Member States in particular, Portugal and 
Spain, indicated that they were considering reinforcing such contacts for the next EP 
elections whereas the United Kingdom and Ireland due to the lack of a central 
population register are unable to introduce such a system. 
European Parliament elections, OJ C 44 of 14.2.1994, p. 159 and Resolution B3-0433/94 on 
obstacles to, and discrimination against,«EU citizens participating in the European elections, 
OJC 128of9.5.1994,p.316: 
In evaluating the importance of the information campaign it should be considered 
that June 1994 was the first time in most Member States when non-nationals had 
access to voting rights. EU citizens were not necessarily aware of the ways in which 
the new entitlements could be exercised as they inevitably differed from the ones 
applying in their own Member States of origin. Moreover, the strict deadlines between 
the date of implementation of the Directive (6 February 1994) and polling day (9-12 
June 1994) made it difficult to relay adequate information on the new entitlements. 
On the basis of the above it can be concluded that delegating the responsibility to 
inform citizens to the local level although it allows to pitch the campaign to particular 
needs, does not always ensure that the information is accessible in an equal manner 
throughout the country. Direct mailing on the other hand ensures an even handed 
approach and has the advantage of making the non-national citizen aware in due time 
not only of the existence of a right but also of the conditions under which it can be 
exercised. This method should therefore be encouraged. 
Non-governmental organisations also contribute to mobilise the EU electorate and 
their participation in the information effort should be encouraged through financial 
aid. In Germany for instance, it was found that registration levels were higher in those 
regions where direct mailing was combined with an effective campaign on the part of 
private organisations. 
3.3 The role of the European institutions 
In the 1994 EP elections, the campaign to inform EU citizens of their new rights 
was carried out mainly by the Member States6. 
In its effort to monitor the impact of the rights flowing from citizenship of the 
Union, in June 1995 the Commission carried out an opinion poll via Eurobarometer 
addressing a number of questions related to the awareness and the emotional 
attachment to citizenship of the Union as well as to rights attached to it7. 
Concerning the right to vote in European elections in the Member State of 
residence, 82% of interviewees were aware of this right. The highest scores were 
registered in Germany and in the Netherlands (89%) whereas the lowest scores were 
registered in Greece (64% ). 
The right to stand as a candidate in the Member State of residence was familiar to 
76%) of interviewees with the highest score registered in Luxembourg (82% ) and the 
lowest again registered in Greece with 56%. Twelve per cent of interviewees thought 
that there was no right to vote in the Member State of residence whereas 16% were 
The EP published a booklet on the right to vote in the Member State of residence which 
contained an overview of the electoral laws in the various Member States which was made 
available through the press offices of the Parliament in the different Member States 
(Infomemo: special elections 18 May 1994.) 
The opinion poll was conducted on the basis of 500 telephone interviews in every Member 
State. 
persuaded that European citizens could not stand as candidates outside their own 
Member State. 
Although purely indicative these results show that efforts still need to be made in 
order to ensure that the European electorate is fully informed of one of the basic rights 
deriving from citizenship of the Union. 
4. Who is entitled to participate and the conditions for the exercise of this 
right. 
The following are entitled to vote and stand as candidates in their Member State of 
residence provided they express a wish to do so: 
• Citizens of the Union who are not nationals of their Member State of residence; 
• who fulfil the conditions to vote and stand applicable to nationals of that State; and 
• who are not deprived of their rights in their Member State of origin. 
4.1 The first application to enter on to the electoral roll 
"A Community voter exercises his right to vote in the Member State of residence if 
he has expressed the wish to do so". This provision is translated in practice by the 
need for the EU citizen to request to be entered on the electoral roll of his Member 
State of residence. 
This obligation may appear to be discriminatory in those Member States where 
entry into the electoral roll is carried out automatically for nationals, on the basis of a 
population register for instance8. But it should be considered that such an application, 
requested only for the first entry into the roll, in fact safeguards the EU citizen's 
freedom to choose whether or not to participate in the electoral process of his/her 
Member State of residence. 
For the 1994 elections, with the exception of Ireland, the Netherlands and the 
United Kingdom, Member States entered their EU residents on the electoral roll on 
the basis of an application. 
Ireland benefited from the transitional provision enshrined in Article 15(a) as its 
EU residents were entered on the electoral roll before the Directive was adopted. The 
Netherlands under Article 15 (c) was entitled to maintain its national system of 
automatic registration on the basis of the population register for the 1994 elections9 
and the United Kingdom and again Ireland, on the basis of the derogation provided for 
in Article 14 (2), received dispensation from registration formalities for their 
respective nationals as these citizens were already able to take part in national 
elections. 
Automatic registration is in fact the rule in all Member States with the exception of Greece, 
France and Portugal 
Cf. infra paragraph 9 
The application to enter into the electoral roll must be made on the basis of a 
formal declaration containing the voter's nationality and address and, where 
applicable, the last constituency in his Member State of origin. The EU voter is also 
requested to state that s/he will exercise his/her vote in his/her Member State of 
residence only. A false statement is punished in all the Member States either by a fine 
or a term of imprisonment. Possible sanctions, however, differ greatly from one 
Member State to another ranging from 8 days to 8 years imprisonment or the 
equivalent fine (cf. Tables 1 for voters and 3 for candidates). If voting is compulsory 
in the Member State of residence, Community voters who have expressed the wish to 
do so are obliged to vote. This is the case in Belgium, Luxembourg and Greece. 
A review of the application of the different criteria that have to be met by EU 
citizens shows the following: 
The nationality criterion: Besides the indication of the voter's nationality, three 
Member States require candidates to indicate the date from which they have been 
nationals of a Member State. However the only instance, where this criterion is linked 
to the exercise of the right to stand as a candidate is in Germany. Here, nationals must 
have held German nationality for at least one year, on the day of the election, whereas 
other Union citizens, in accordance to Article 3(2) of the Directive, are deemed to 
have met this condition if they have been nationals of a Member State for the same 
period10 thereby meeting the requirement of non-discrimination. 
Proof of identity: Articles 9(3) and 10(3) of the Directive allow Member States to 
introduce the option of requesting the production of a valid identity document for 
enrolment of voters and application for candidates. Only six Members States made 
use of this option, the remaining preferring to rely on the citizen's declaration (cf. 
Table 5 ) 
The concern of the Commission's services in this case was geared toward ensuring 
that Union citizens were effectively allowed to enter in the electoral roll simply by 
producing a valid identity document issued by their own national authorities. An 
example of the above is the adoption by Spain of Real Decreto 157/1996 that removes 
the obligation for Union citizens to produce a Spanish residence permit to gain entry 
on the electoral roll. 
The residence criterion: In the absence of a definition of residence either in the 
Treaty or in the text of the Directive, it is up to Member States themselves to apply, in 
a non-discriminatory way, to their nationals and to Union citizens alike, the residence 
concept as it flows from their own national legislation. 
Section 6b §1 (l)and § 2(1) of the European Elections Act-EuWG. Consequently non-
German candidates are required to submit to the returning officer along with the nomination 
a statutory declaration as to the length of time for which they have been nationals of one of 
the other Member States of the European Union (cf. section 11(2) of the European Elections 
Act-EuWG) 
The Directive however does contain a provision on the subject. In order to avoid a 
requirement by Member States that all electors should complete a residence period 
which in practice could be attained easily be nationals but only with difficulty by non-
nationals, Article 5 indicates that a requirement of a minimum residence period may 
be deemed to have been fulfilled by non-nationals if they resided for an equivalent 
period in another Member State. This provision is to apply without prejudice to any 
specific condition as to the length of residence in a given constituency as long as this 
is applied in a non-discriminatory way. 
Accordingly, in Germany, the residence period of three months required from 
nationals and non-national residents is deemed to be fulfilled by the latter if the same 
period was spent in another Member State of the European Union11. But in France, 
nationals and community voters alike are subject to a six month residence period if 
they choose to enrol in the commune where they elect their residence whereas no 
residence period is requested if they enrol in the commune of their domicile12. In 
Northern Ireland, nationals and non-nationals alike are subject to a three month period 
of residence in the constituency before they may vote. 
The application of the rule of equal treatment as far as the residence condition is 
concerned also means that Community voters benefit from the same treatment as 
nationals if the latter are allowed, for instance, to exercise their electoral rights in the 
place of their secondary residence. An example of such may be found in the French 
legislation which allows nationals and non-nationals alike to enrol, under certain 
conditions in the municipality of their secondary residence, provided of course that 
the Community nationals are effectively resident somewhere else in French territory13. 
4.2 Maintenance on the electoral roll 
Once entered on the electoral roll of their Member State of residence, EU citizens 
remain on it, under the same conditions as nationals, until they request to be removed 
from it or until they are automatically removed because they no longer fulfil the 
necessary residence conditions. This is a particularly important provision of the 
Directive which in fact enables Union citizens living in another Member State to 
gradually integrate in the electoral process of the host Member State. 
For the next European Parliament elections, newcomers or non-national residents 
who did not take part in the 1994 EP elections in their Member State of residence and 
who wish to do so for 1999 will need to submit their first application to be entered on 
the electoral roll, within the prescribed national deadlines (cf. Table 7). On the other 
hand EU residents who have already registered in 1994 will not need to renew their 
applications14. This split of the expatriate EU community may need careful 
implementation especially on the part of those Member States which establish 
electoral rolls on the basis of their population registers. 
1 * Cf. Section 6 §1 (2) and §3 (2) European elections Act -EuWG 
12 Cf. Article LI 1 French electoral code 
13 Loi du 5 février 1994 n°94-104 Article LI 1 (2) of the electoral code 
14 Except in Greece, Portugal and France where nationals and non-national residents are 
entered on the roll on application only. 
In Germany however, due to the absence of a permanent electoral roll, Union 
citizens are required to apply to register for every single EP election even if they took 
part in the previous election and to that effect were entered on the electoral roll in 
Germany. Considering that German nationals are entered on the electoral roll 
automatically on the basis of the population register and therefore do not need to 
apply to register, this practice is regarded by many citizens as being discriminatory in 
their regard. The Commission is presently investigating the situation with the 
Member State concerned. 
4.3. The disqualification rule 
Union citizens that lose their right to vote or to stand as a candidate in their 
Member State of origin through an individual criminal law or civil law decision, may 
not regain these rights simply by moving into another Member State. Besides being 
subject to disqualification rules in their own Member States, EU citizens are also 
subject to the rules in force in their Member State of residence and applicable to 
nationals of that State. 
In order to operate a system of concurrent disqualifications, the Directive provides 
for the Member States to exchange information on voters on an optional basis and to 
require an attestation from the candidate's Member State of origin attesting his 
eligibility. 
Thus all Member States with the exception of Ireland15, Sweden and the United 
Kingdom made use of the option in Article 9 (3-a) and requested that voters state in 
the formal declaration that they have not been deprived of their right to vote in their 
Member State of origin. But only four actually verified, if such a statement was 
correct, making Article 7 (1) the least used option in Directive 93/109 (cf. Table 5). In 
Italy, clarification of the implementing law is still underway16. 
Concerning candidates, the Commission's main concern was to ensure that even in 
those Member States where it is up to the national Parliaments to decide, after the 
elections, whether candidatures are admissible, the attestation from the Member State 
of origin foreseen by Article 10 (3) is required at the time of the presentation of the 
candidature. Thus, the Dutch authorities have recently informed the Commission of 
their intention to implement such a system17. 
Throughout the control of implementation very few Member States reported cases 
of disqualified EU citizens attempting to vote in the' Member State of residence. 
Applications to register were turned down more often due to registration deadlines 
rather than to disqualification of entitlements. 
15 In Ireland the legal system does not provide for the possibility of loosing the right to vote 
through a court decision. 
16 Article 14, Bill 95/97 modifying Law n°483 is presently being examined by the Camera dei 
Deputati 
17 Draft bill adopted by the Dutch government on 19 September 1997 
12 
It is worth noting that the United Kingdom is the only Member State that deprives 
its own citizens of the right to vote and to stand if they have resided abroad for more 
than 20 years. These British nationals, if they are resident in another Member State, 
qualify to participate as voters and candidates in their Member State of residence, 
because they have been deprived of their rights simply on account of their residence 
abroad. Similarly to enfranchise these expatriate EU citizens, Luxembourg which may 
require of its non-national residents a period of 5 years' residence before granting the 
right to vote, has included in its law a specific provision eliminating this requirement 
for those non-national citizens who have lost their rights due to a period of residence 
abroad18, in accordance to Article 14(1). 
CHAPTER II: EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE 
5. The participation of non-national voters and candidates 
Voters 
Available information shows that there was a very low participation of non-
national voters in the Member State of residence for the June 1994 elections. Amongst 
the Twelve aggregate non-national voter turnout was of 5.11%. In the new Member 
States in their first EP elections held in 1995 and 1996 it increased considerably to 
18.19%.. Aggregate turnout in the Fifteen was of 5.87%. 
These figures relate to registered voters oniy. With the exception of Greece, 
Luxembourg and Belgium where voting is compulsory, it is impossible to determine 
how many non-national residents actually voted. This is due to the fact that non-
nationals are listed together with nationals and the secrecy of the ballot makes it 
unconstitutional in most MS to know if and how a citizen voted. 
Table 1 contains, per Member State, the general level of participation, the total 
electorate, the number of potential non-national voters and the numbers of those who 
actually enrolled in their Member State of residence. The percentage of the non-
national registered voters varied from a peak of 44.11% in Ireland where the right to 
vote in European Parliament elections dates back to 1979 to a low of 1.55% in 
Greece. It should be noted that no figure is available from the Netherlands on account 
of the application of the transitional provision for automatic voter registration on the 
basis of the population register. Similarly, there are no figures concerning Irish 
nationals voting in the United Kingdom and British nationals voting in Ireland on 
account of the fact that these citizens where entered on the electoral lists under exactly 
the same conditions as nationals, in conformity with the derogation provided for in 
Article 14(2). 
Needless to say that in the above figures are not included those EU citizens that 
voted in their Member State of residence but in favour of candidates from their own 
Member State through embassies, consulates or by proxy (cfr Table 2). 
Article 1 (4) loi 28 janvier 1994 
13 
Candidates 
Throughout the Union 53 non-national candidates stood for election and one was 
successfully elected in her Member State of residence19 (cf. Table 3). 
6. The reasons for a low turnout 
The novelty of the rights: The Maastricht Treaty enfranchised non-national EU 
citizens in November 1992. Prior to this only four Member States granted voting 
rights to nationals from other Member States. 
Strict registration deadlines: Directive 109/93 was adopted on 6 December 1993. 
Member States had to introduce the implementing laws by 1 February 1994 and 
apply them in the June 1994 EP elections. In most Member States, normal 
registration deadlines were extended in order to allow non-nationals to enter into 
the electoral roll, as specifically called for in Article 9 (1) of the Directive and 
echoed in a resolution of the EP20. In spite of these efforts, in some Member 
States non-nationals barely had 15 days in which to register. Inevitably the strict 
deadlines also had an impact on the candidature of non-nationals who had 
difficulties in building up an electorate and asserting their positions (cf. Table 1 
for voters and Table 3 for candidates). 
Insufficient information campaign: As explained above in paragraph 3.2 best 
results wrere attained when the non-national electorate was mobilised through 
direct mailing and the participation of non-governmental organisations. But this 
was the exception to the rule of administrative posting used by 10 Member States. 
The option to vote for candidates of the Member State of origin: One of the main 
principles of the Directive is to ensure the citizen's freedom to choose where to 
exercise his/her rights. All Member States with the exception of Ireland grant 
their expatriate citizens the right to vote for their own national candidates in 
European Parliament elections through embassies, consulates, by proxy or 
correspondence. Incomplete data shows that roughly 6.57 % of EU citizens living 
in another Member State made use of this possibility (cf. Table 2). 
Access to political activity prior to elections and its impact on the participation of 
non-nationals as candidates. Although present EC Treaty provisions merely 
grant voting rights without mentioning other political rights such as the right of 
association and freedom of expression, information provided by Member States 
shows that in theory access to political activity is open to EU citizens. 
19 Ms Wilmya Zimmermann, a Dutch citizen resident in Germany (PSE/D) 
20 EP Resolution B3-0433 of 21.4.1994 called for the registration deadline to be extended, 
throughout the Union, to 31 May 1994, OJ C 128/316 of 9.5.1994 
14 
Yet some Member States subject the political activity of non-nationals to a 
number of conditions and political parties admit non-nationals at their sole 
discretion (cf. Table 2). The link between voting rights and the participation in 
the political debate is all the more clear if we consider that in some Member 
States only political parties are entitled to present candidates for European 
Parliament elections. 
National rather than European issues debated: In almost all the Member State, 
European Parliament elections have been centred around national issues. 
Consequently expatriate EU citizens may have felt more comfortable voting for 
candidates of their own Member State to whom they could relate in a well-known 
political context21. 
In one Member State (L) it was found that the highest registration turnout was 
amongst second/third generation immigrants. This could indicate that those who 
could relate to national issues and were sufficiently integrated in their host 
Member State were more likely to participate in its electoral process. 
Overall decline in voter turnout: Alongside the above mentioned reasons specific 
to non-nationals voters and candidates, the steady decline in national voter 
participation in European Parliament elections to an all time low of 56.5% in June 
1994 should be considered as a contributing factor. 
7. The exchange of information between Member States 
The mechanism set up by the Directive 
The exchange of information as set out in Article 13 was established primarily 
to avoid the double vote and/or the double candidature whilst safeguarding the 
citizen's freedom to choose in which Member State to cast his/her vote. Secondly, 
it also serves the purpose of preventing citizens deprived of their rights to 
vote/stand in their Member State of origin to regain them simply by moving to 
another Member State - but this aspect of the information exchange was dealt with 
under paragraph 4.3 
The mechanism provides for the Member State of residence, on the basis of the 
formal declaration, to inform the Member State of origin of all the names of their 
nationals entered into the electoral roll or standing as candidates. As a result, the 
Member State of origin takes the appropriate steps to prevent its own nationals 
from voting or standing more than once - usually by deleting their names from 
their own electoral roll. 
") i 
-l A spontaneous inquiry of officials of the European institutions to which roughly 2% of the 
staff replied revealed that the most important reason preventing them from voting in their 
Member State of residence was the fact that the election campaign was focused exclusively 
on national issues. Cf. also Eurobarometer survey on the possible factors influencing the vote 
as well as Blondel, Sinnott, Svensson, Participation and the legitimacy of European 
integration.The nature, sources and implications of low turnout in EP elections, European 
University Institute, Florence, April 1997. 
15 
Its implementation • 
During the expert meeting held in July 1995, there was agreement amongst 
delegations that prior to the June 94 elections, the information exchange did not 
work satisfactorily. The problems were linked either to time constraints for the 
exchange of information itself or to practical difficulties affecting the reliability of 
the information. For instance: 
a) Information arrived too late and could not be processed 
b) It was insufficient and not addressed to the proper authorities 
c) The vector used was not compatible 
In the case of the elections held in the three new Member States in the course of 
1995 and 1996, the problem of avoiding the double vote was tackled mainly on the 
basis of the citizen's declaration that they had not taken part in the June 1994 EP 
elections in their Member State of origin. The reason for this was that although co­
operation with the Twelve was forthcoming, the electoral lists relating to those 
elections were not always available. 
Besides these problems that were common to all the Member States, other 
issues are specific to some Member States only. In the United Kingdom and in the 
Republic of Ireland, for instance, electors' names cannot be removed from the 
annual electoral register once they have been entered into it. For all practical 
purposes these Member States cannot use the information relating to their citizens 
registered as electors in other Member States which is .notified just before 
elections, as the electoral roll is finalized in February of each year and the 
exchange of information with the other Member States takes place in June. This 
situation however is mitigated by the fact that there is an annual update of the 
electoral roll on the basis of a household canvassing. Nationals and non-nationals 
who leave Ireland or the United Kingdom do not have to request to be deleted from 
the electoral roll as this is done automatically at the annual review. Another 
mitigating factor for Ireland is that, with the exception of diplomats and their 
spouses, Irish citizens resident abroad are not entitled to be registered for or to vote 
at European Parliament elections. 
In another Member State, the implementing legislation did not contain any 
provision for the names of Community voters entered on the electoral roll at a 
previous election to be notified to their Member States of origin. This situation has 
now changed through an amendment to the implementation law22. 
A similar problem is to be found in Ireland. Its permanent EU residents which 
took part in the June 1994 elections have never manifested their intention to vote 
there as they were entered on the electoral roll under exactly the same conditions as 
nationals in fulfilment of Article 15 (c) of the Directive. If they continue to reside 
Law amending the Law on the election of Danish representatives to the European Parliament 
of 13 January 1997 
16 
in Ireland these EU citizens shall remain in the electoral roll under the same 
conditions as nationals, in application of Article 8 (4) the Directive. But as they did 
not fill the formal declaration for entry into the roll in 1994, the Irish authorities do 
not have, at present, the information which will be necessary to notify their 
Member States of origin in 1999 and enable them to delete their names from their 
own electoral rolls23. 
Means of improvement 
Any improvement to the information exchange mechanism must take into account 
the fact that Directive 93/109 based on Article 8B24 may not encroach on an uniform 
electoral procedure. This means that any envisaged solution cannot be based on the 
establishment of a period of time within which the exchange of information must take 
place or on the introduction of a deadline for its completion. Both would involve a 
change in the registration dates which in turn would require harmonisation of national 
electoral laws. 
Another issue to be looked at is the scale of the problem the exchange of 
information is meant to solve. Throughout the control of implementation of the 
Directive, there was no report from Member States on significant cases of double 
voting. On the contrary,- Member States reported that the few cases of double 
registration tended to be linked to mistakes due, in part at least, to the novelty of the 
rights involved. Any improvement to the exchange of information mechanism 
therefore must not be disproportionate to the problem at hand. 
This may not be the case for instance, if the approach chosen would be a stricter 
control of double voting after the elections. The means to achieve this could be a 
reinforcement of the sanctions for false statements. The advantage here is that checks 
could be carried out without time constraints. The drawback is that sanctions would 
be linked to the double registration and not to the double vote itself, due to the lack of 
records on actual voters. Furthermore, to be effective, sanctions would have to be 
dissuasive throughout the Union and this could inevitably entail adjustments as they 
differ greatly from one Member State to another (cf. Table 3). Finally, as some 
complaints to the Commission point out, the increased threat of sanctions may 
dissuade some citizens from exercising their option to vote in their Member State of 
residence. 
In absence of a uniform electoral procedure, therefore, the answer must be found 
within the present system25. 
23 This problem does not concern newcomers to Ireland as their entry into the electoral roll will 
be carried out in conformity with Article 9, through a formal declaration, the contents of 
which will be notified to the Member State of origin (Sec 6(1) and 2) European Parliament 
Elections Act 1997) and infra paragraph 8.2 
24 Article 8B (2) specifically indicates that conferring voting rights to EP elections shall be 
"...without prejudice to Article 138(3) and the provisions adopted for its implementation..." 
25 cfr infra Chapter III, paragraph 9 
17 
8. Derogations and transitional provisions 
8,1 Derogations 
Directive 93/109 contains two derogations to the general principle of non­
discrimination. The derogations, warranted by a specific situation in a Member State 
are provided for in Article 14 and are subject to review. The directive itself requires 
the Commission to submit, by 31 December 1997 and thereafter 18 months prior to 
each election, a report to the European Parliament and the Council in which it verifies 
whether the grant of a derogation to a Member State is still warranted by a specific 
situation in that Member State. Adjustments may be proposed by the Commission, if 
necessary. 
The first derogation provided for by Article 14 (1), enables Member States that on 
1 January 1993 detain a proportion of non-national Union citizens that exceed 20% of 
the total number of eligible citizens residing in its territory to restrict the right to vote 
and to stand as a candidate to those non-nationals who have completed a residence 
period of five and 10 years respectively. 
On the reference date, Luxembourg was the only Member State to apply for such 
for such a derogation and it fully qualified for it as the percentage of non-national 
citizens residing in the Grand-Duchy in January 1994 was of 29,4%. 
The right to vote is granted to EU non-nationals who have completed a minimum 
residence period of 5 years in the Grand-Duchy during the last 6 years, prior to the 
request to be entered on the electoral roll. The right to stand as a candidate is given 
after at least 10 years' residence completed in the course of the last 12 years26. These 
provisions in fact allow those who are permanently resident in Luxembourg to leave 
the country for a period of one year without losing their voting rights in the Grand-
Duchy. Similarly EU citizens who have lost their right to vote in their home State by 
reason of their residence abroad are not subject to this minimum residence 
requirement. 
For entry into the electoral roll, a residence certificate, issued by a public authority 
attesting the period of time for which the non-nationals has resided in Luxembourg 
must be produced. As this requirement is not mentioned in the Directive, the 
Commission's services examined the issue with the Luxembourg authorities. It was 
concluded that such a requirement was legitimate and proportionate in so far as it was 
the only means to determine if the residence condition was fulfilled. The certificate is 
requested only once - for the first entrance into the electoral roll - and may be 
obtained fairly easily from the municipality of residence at a minimum cost. 
Moreover in Luxembourg, candidates' lists may not be composed exclusively of 
non-nationals27. This provision was confronted with Article 14(1)28 and found to be 
26 Articles 1 (4) and 98 (4) Loi du 28 janvier 1994. 
27 Article 106 (2) Loi du 28 janvier 1994 
18 
compatible with the Directive. As Luxembourg benefits from a derogation on the 
basis of its large population of non-national EU residents, this measure appears 
appropriate to avoid polarisation between national and non-national lists thus 
encouraging the non-national candidates to participate alongside nationals, in the 
same lists29. 
The Luxembourg authorities have informed the Commission that at present there 
are 109.613 non-national EU citizens of voting age resident in Luxembourg and that 
they constitute 33,4 % of the total number of eligible EU citizens resident in the 
Grand-Duchy. These figures may be overestimated by a margin of error of between 7 
to 8%o points30. 
Considering that these figures fall within the prescribed limits set by Article 14(1), 
on the basis of the above, the Commission submits that the derogation awarded to 
Luxembourg should be extended, on the same basis to the next European Parliament 
elections. 
The second derogation concerns those Members States which, on 1 February 1994 
granted voting rights to nationals of other Member States in their national elections 
and for that purpose entered them on the electoral roll exactly under the same 
conditions as nationals. These Member States are exempted from the provisions of 
Articles 6 to 13 generally in connection with registration formalities. 
The Member States that qualify for such a derogation are Ireland and the United 
Kingdom with respect to each others' nationals. Considering that these voters exercise 
their rights under the exact same conditions as nationals in all other elections, the 
Commission accepts that this system be confirmed for future EP elections. 
8.2. Transitional provisions 
The Directive contains four transitional provisions applicable to the 1994 elections 
only. 
The first provision contained in Article 15 (a), relates to those Member States 
where citizens of the Union already had the right to vote by 15 February 1994. If they 
names appeared on the electoral roll by that date, they were not required to make an 
application to register. This was the case in Ireland where EU citizens have had the 
right to vote in EP elections since 1979. 
On this basis, for the 1994 elections, the registration procedure for non-national EU 
citizens was unchanged from previous elections and identical to that for Irish citizens 
as the registration authorities were required to register all eligible electors. 
28 "This provisions (i.e. concerning the minimum residence period) are without 
prejudice to appropriate measures which this Member State may take with 
regard to the composition of lists of candidates and which are intended in 
particular to encourage the integration of non-national Union citizens " 
29 Cf. penultimate recital of the Directive 
30 Repertoire Général des Personnes Physiques - reference period October 1997 
19 
This will be changed in the next European Parliament elections. Non-national 
Union citizens, other than British nationals, who were not entered on the register of 
electors for the 1994 EP elections will have to apply, in writing to be registered as 
voters in Ireland. The application can be made throughout the year, at the latest 15 
working days before polling day31. 
The second and fourth transitional provisions were generally designed to ensure 
that in spite of the strict deadlines for implementation of the Directive, the national 
legislations in force at the time, effectively allowed Union citizens to be entered in the 
electoral roll or to submit their candidature, in time for the June EP elections. In most 
Member States, the traditional registration deadlines were extended in order to allow 
for non-nationals to enter into the electoral roll or to stand as candidates (cf. Tables 1 
and 3). 
The third transitional provision, Article 15 (c), allowed those Member States that 
do not draw up a specific electoral roll but rely on population registers to apply the 
same system to its non-national EU residents and disregard Articles 8 (manifestation 
of the will to vote in the Member State of residence) and 9 (application to enter into 
the roll). 
The Netherlands qualified and made use of such a provision. Thus, in May 1994 
all eligible voters, irrespective of nationality, were automatically entered on the 
electoral roll on the basis of the population register. Non-national EU citizens were 
nevertheless informed individually of this fact and received, at their home address, a 
standard form in which they had to indicate whether they wished to vote in their 
Member State of origin or in the Netherlands32. The form had to be returned at the 
latest three weeks before polling day, failing which the EU voter was automatically 
registered as voter in the Netherlands. The voter's Member State of origin was 
informed of this fact and the EU citizen automatically lost his right to vote in his 
Member State of origin. 
But a situation whereby an EU citizen automatically looses his right to vote in his 
Member State of origin simply because he/she has not reacted in time to a letter does 
not seem to offer sufficient protection to the citizen's freedom of choice as to the 
Member State in which to cast his/her vote. 
As announced by the Dutch government at the time of the implementation of the 
Directive, the present system is likely to be changed. To that effect, a government bill 
was presented on 19 September 1997. It proposes that non-nationals registered in their 
municipality of residence shall continue to receive, before the elections, a standard 
form asking them in which Member State they wish to vote. Should the form not be 
returned on time the EU citizen is considered to have opted to vote in his Member 
State of origin. By so doing, two obligations established by the Directive will be 
fulfilled - the duty to inform the citizen in good time and in appropriate manner of his 
3 ' Sec 6(1) and 2) European Parliament Elections Act 1997 
32 Articles Y 3 b4 and Y33 of Law 26 January 1994 amending the electoral law. 
20 
electoral rights and secondly the respect of the citizens' freedom to choose whether or 
not to take part in elections in the Member State of residence. 
21 
CHAPTER III. CONCLUSIONS 
Council Directive 93/109/EC was applied to the last European Parliament elections 
in all the Member States enabling expatriate Union citizens to take part in the 
elections in their Member State of residence. 
The analysis of the implementation laws is complete and on its basis the 
Commission considers that overall the Directive has been implemented satisfactorily 
by the Member States. In the meantime a number of minor adjustments to those laws 
have been carried out by the Member States. 
But the results of the June 1994 election highlighted two shortcomings in the 
participation of non-national EU citizens. First and foremost there was a lack of 
information about new rights. Secondly there was a dramatically low rate of 
successful non-national candidates. 
The Commission submits that at this stage, the Directive itself does not need to be 
changed. This being said, improvements in its application should be carried out by 
Member States specifically with regard to Articles 12 and 13, with a view to 
increasing participation of non-national voters and candidates and to fine tune the 
mechanism for the exchange of information between the Member States. 
Finally, considering the most recent population figures, the derogation for 
Luxembourg with regard to a minimum residence period should be confirmed for the 
next European Parliament elections. 
9. SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE APPLICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE: 
Information campaign 
Member States should substantially increase their efforts to inform their non-
national EU residents as provided for by Article 12 of the Directive. This is 
particularly the case for those Member States that do not contact their EU citizens 
individually and make use of administrative posting only. 
A particular effort should be made to inform EU citizens of registration deadlines. 
Those that already enrolled in their Member State of residence for the 1994 election 
will remain in the electoral roll until they request to be removed from it but 
newcomers might not even be aware of the deadline for registration in the host 
Member State. Although in the majority of Member States the average deadline for 
registering in the electoral roll is eight weeks prior to polling day, in some Member 
States citizens must apply over a year before elections are held (cf. Table 7) 
To overcome the information deficit, in 1996 the European Commission launched, 
together with the European Parliament, a vast information initiative, "Citizens First", 
geared to promote information on citizens' rights under Community law. It issued, 
22 
amongst several other guides, the guide "Living in another Member State" which 
contains general information on the rights and obligations arising when moving into 
another Member State as well as references on how electoral rights may be exercised 
in the Member State of residence. 
Available with the guide "Living in another Member State" are fifteen factsheets 
on how to vote and stand as a candidate in European Parliament elections. The 
factsheets, for each Member State, are available in all official languages through the 
Internet and may also be requested like the guides, free of charge, by telephone33. 
They have been drafted by the Commission and approved by national authorities. 
They contain practical and detailed information on each Member State's legislation 
and feature the documents that have to be produced to be entered on the electoral roll, 
the deadlines for registration, the means of appeal available to the citizen and the 
contact points in the Member States where the citizen may obtain further help and 
assistance. 
As part of the Single Market Action Plan endorsed by Member States at the 
Amsterdam Summit, a permanent "Dialogue with Citizens" will be established as a 
successor to "Citizens First". For the next European Parliament elections therefore, 
the European Commission together with the European Parliament will be able to 
provide clear and detailed information on how voting rights can be exercised in all 
Member States and in all official EU languages. 
In addition, the Citizens First Signpost service will be available to help people 
when they have difficulties in knowing how to exercise their rights Typically the 
service will give people details of the appropriate points of contact at European, 
national or local level. The Signpost Service has been open since 1996, and questions 
can be put simply by using the telephone line or by Internet. These questions from 
citizens are important because they give the Commission a direct "feedback" about 
the practical problems which people face when using their EU rights. 
Exchange of information between Member States: 
In order to curb the double vote, Article 13 requires Member States to exchange 
information about their nationals voting in their Member State of residence. The 
Commission submits that substantial improvement in the application of the current 
provisions should be carried out. 
The objective is to find a reliable, flexible and cost effective way for Member 
States to exchange information about their nationals voting in another Member State, 
in time to introduce modifications to the electoral rolls. Furthermore the exchange of 
information must be carried out in respect of the rules protecting individuals with 
33 Internet address: http://europa.eu.int/citizens. Telephone numbers in the various Member 
States: Austria (0660-6811), The Netherlands (0800-8051), Italy (167-876166) Belgium 
(0800-92038 in Dutch and 0800-92039 in French), Sweden (020-794949), Luxembourg 
(0800-2550), France (0800 90-9700), Greece (00800-3212254), Portugal (0800-222001), 
Spain (900-983198), Germany (0130-850400), UK (0800-581591), Ireland (1-800-553188), 
Finland (08001-13191) Denmark (8001 -0201 ) 
regard to the processing and free movement of personal data34. In order to achieve this 
the Commission's services.are presently working with Member States with a view: 
• to pinpoint the national authorities to whom the notification must be addressed by 
the Member State of residence 
• to identify the exact information that Member States' need to delete the voter's 
name from their own electoral register as well as the time which is necessary to 
keep such information in order to delete the voter's name 
• to agree on a common format for a standard form for the exchange of information 
• to explore ways in which the exchange of information may be carried out 
electronically in order to speed up proceedings. 
Should the above mentioned issues be resolved, the main problems identified in the 
monitoring of the implementation, i.e. reliability of the information and time 
constraints, will have been addressed. 
However, should the attempt fail and the system as presently conceived prove to be 
incompatible with wide ranging registration deadlines in the Member States (cf. Table 
7), the only alternative would be to modify the Directive. But in this case the option 
available would be to eliminate the citizens' freedom to choose in which Member 
State to cast his vote or to restrict that choice to a specific time frame which would 
allow for double registrations into the electoral rolls to be corrected. 'to* 
Concerning candidates, in order to assist electoral officers dealing with the 
applications of non-national EU citizens standing as candidates, the Commission 
suggests that Member States should circulate in advance of the next EP elections, the 
indications of their competent administrative authorities that will issue the attestation 
of eligibility required by Article 10 (2) and include, if possible, a sample of the 
attestation. 
Access to political activity prior to elections 
Although not foreseen by a specific provision of the directive, the Commission 
would like to draw the attention to the need to facilitate the participation of non-
national EU citizens in the political life of their Member State of residence. This in 
order to ensure that the right to stand as a candidate is more accessible and widely 
enjoyed by non-national EU citizens. 
The European Parliament has already called for an increased role of European 
political parties35 and is presently drafting a proposal for a procedure incorporating 
common principles for the election of members of the European Parliament in 
accordance to Article 138(3) as reviewed by the Amsterdam Treaty36. Throughout this 
34 Council Directive 95/46/EC of 24 July 1995 on the protection of personal data, OJ L L281/31 
of 23.11.1995 
3:1 Cf. also Resolution of the European Parliament on the constitutional status of European 
political parties adopted on 10.12.1996 - Doc PE 254.448 
36 Working document of 22 October 1997- Committee on Institutional Affairs - Doc PE 
224.331 
24 
process special attention should be paid to the contribution that EU citizens resident in 
a Member State of which they are not nationals, may offer towards the democratic 
process in the Union. 
Information provided by Member States indicates that, in theory access to political 
activity is open to all EU citizens (cfr Table 2). This being said, at national level 
efforts should be deployed to remove any potential obstacles to the political activity 
of non-nationals Union citizens. The role of political parties is of course paramount 
towards the achievement of this goal. Not only because they are an important 
instrument of democratic participation but first and foremost because they are able to 
promote the candidature of non-national Union citizens. Yet in some Member States 
political parties admit non-nationals at their sole discretion. The link between voting 
rights and the participation in the political debate is all the more clear if we consider 
that in some Member States only political parties are entitled to present candidates for 
European Parliament elections. 
The Commission for its part will fulfil its role of guardian of the Treaty and take all 
the necessary steps towards ensuring that discrimination on the basis of nationality 
does not hinder Union citizens from presenting their candidature. 
25 
TABLE 1* IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/109/EC 
PARTICIPATION OF NON-NATIONAL EU-VOTERS - EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS 1994 
Member 
State 
Belgium 
(voting is 
compulsory) 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
(voting is 
compulsory) 
Spain Deadline for 
registration 
as voter 
7.2.94 
-31.3.94 
9.3.94 
- 28.4.94 
end March -
- 9.5.94 
8.1 .94 
-31.3.94 
3.1.94 
-15.2.94 
and 
25.4. 94 
-2.5.94 General level of 
participation in 
elections 
90.7% 
(total electorate: 
7.096,273) 
52.9% 
(total electorate: 
3.994.200) 
60% 
(total electorate: 
60,473,927) 
71.2% 
(total electorate: 
8.485.495) 
59.1% 
(total electorate: 
18,664.053) Potential non-
national 
EU-voters 
471,277 
27,042 
1,200,000 
ca. 40,000 
192,074 
(including 
minors on 
31.12.1993) Non-national EU 
voters enrolled 
and percentage 
of non-national 
electorate) 
24,000 
(5.1%) 
6,719 
(24.85%) 
80,000 
(6.66%) 
622 
(1.55%) 
24,227 
(12.61%) Sanctions for voting twice or 
false declarations 
Imprisonment 8-15 days, and/or 
fine 26 - 200 BF (Art. 1, law 
23.3.1989 as amended) 
Double vote: fine 
False Declarations: fine or 
imprisonment up to 4 months 
Fine or imprisonment not 
exceeding three years 
Imprisonment 3 months - 5 years 
and barred from public office as 
provided for in Art. 63 of the 
Penal Code. 1-5 years Art. 104 
and 108 of the Electoral Law. 
Double vote: 6 months 
imprisonment, disqualification, 
and fine from 30,000 to 300.000 
ptas (Art. 142 LOREG) Information campaign 
Press conference by the Ministry of the 
Interior, information note in official 
journal, information brochures. 
Municipalities have responsibility' for 
decentralised information campaign. 
Individual letters to all foreign EU 
nationals over 18 
Municipalities have responsibility for 
decentralised information campaign. 
Measures vary from folders in 9 
languages to individual information in 
different languages. Radio and TV 
programmes. 
One TV spot sponsored by Government. 
In January 1994, information from the 
Ministry of the Interior was relayed under 
the responsibility of local authorities. 
Radio spots, press announcements, 
posters, all sponsored by Government 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
(voting is 
compulsory) 
Netherlands 
Austria ** 
Portugal 
Finland ** 14.3.94 
- 15.4.94 
- 24.5.94 
26.2.94 -
24.3.94 
- 1.3.94 
Deadline for 
opt out until 
19.5.94 
30.8.1996 
(reference 
date) to 
10.10.96 
1.3.94 
-15.3.94 
June to 
15.8.96 52.7% 
(total electorate: 
39,044,441) 
44% 
(total electorate: 
2,639,000 including 
British citizens) 
73,7% 
(total electorate: 
48,372,726) 
88.5% 
(total electorate 
198,370) 
36% 
(total electorate: 
11,618,677) 
67.73% 
(total electorate 
5,800,377) 
35.5% 
(total electorate: 
8,555, 733) 
60.3% 
(total electorate 
4.108.703) 1,427,315 
ca. 13,600 
(excluding 
British 
citizens) 
152.139 
105,000 
ca. 160,000 
91,385 
30,519 
(includes under 
18 years old) 
11.296 47,508 
(3.38%) 
6,000 
(excluding British 
citizens) 
(44.11 %) 
2.809 
(1.8%) 
6,907 
(6,58%) 
No data available 
7.261 
(7.94 %) 
715 
(2.34%) 
2.515 
(22%) For false declaration: 1 year 
imprisonment and 100.000FF 
fine. 
Double vote: 2 years 
imprisonment and 100,000 FF 
fine 
Double vote: fine not exceeding 
1,000 IEP and/or max. 2 years 
imprisonment. False declarations: 
fine not exceeding 50 IEP and/or 
imprisonment max. 3 months 
Double vote: 1 - 3 years 
imprisonment and fine 
100,000/500,000 LIT 
10,000/100,000 FL fine 
Double vote: imprisonment up to 
1 month or fine up to 5,000 NLG. 
False declaration: imprisonment 
up to 6 years or fine up to 
100,000 NLG 
False declaration: Fine up to OS 
3,000 or two weeks imprisonment 
vote by an non-eligible: 6 months 
imprisonment or fine 
corresponding to 360 daily units 
Double vote and false 
declarations: up to 1 year 
imprisonment and 50 days fine 
(art 14 Lei 14/87 and art 53B Lei 
69/78). 
Double vote: fine or 
imprisonment of maximum I year 
False declarations: fine or a 
maximum of 2 years 
imprisonment Compulsory administrative posting in 
every "commune". Préfets of police 
pitched the information campaign in 
accordance to the number of non-
nationals EU citizens in each 
"département", through press releases and 
radio announcements.. Private associations 
also participated. 
Press release, compulsory public notice 
and information sheets to EU embassies in 
Dublin 
Information leaflets forwarded to mayors 
for compulsory posting in municipalities. 
Information leaflet published in 5 
languages and forward to all residents 
nationals and non-nationals alike. 
Individual letters to all foreign EU 
nationals 
Ministry of interior produced information 
sheets in German. In large municipalities 
EU nationals were informed in writing of 
their entitlements. Further information on 
radio, TV, newspapers 
Press announcements, Radio, TV. 
Information brochure and poster in 5 
languages sponsored by Government and 
distributed to local authorities and 
embassies. 
Letter to all registered EU citizens in 
Finnish, Swedish, English , German and 
French forwarded in June with attached 
application form, informing them of their 
entitlements. 
Sweden** 
United 
Kingdom 
EU Total 1.5.1995-
3.7.1995 
17.2.-29.3 
(late claims 
for 
registration 
were accepted 
until 22.4.94) 41.64% 
6 551 781 
36.4% 
(total electorate: 
43,770.000 
(including Irish 
citizens) Ca. 150 000 
ca. 400.000 
(excluding 
Irish citizens) 
ca. 4.471.647 
(-NL 
4.311.647) 36 191 
(24%) 
7.845 
(excluding Irish 
citizens (1.96%)) 
ca. 253.319 (c.xcl. 
NL) Double vote: no penalty 
False declaration: fine or 
imprisonment not exceeding 6 
months 
Fine of up to 1,000 GBP for 
cither. Letter with, registration form forwarded 
on 6 April to all Union citizens on 
register of population. Those taking up 
residence afterwards were given a 
registration form when they registered 
their residence 
Press release and TV broadcast in 
Swedish onlv. 
Press release, official statement and • 
information sheets to embassies and 
consulates, private associations, electoral 
registration officers and Citizens Advice 
Bureaux. In N. Ireland, information 
leaflets delivered to even' household. 
* Information provided by the Member States 
** Sweden held its first EP elections on 17 September 1995, Austria on 13 October and Finland on 20 October 1996 
TABLE 2* IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCI L DIRECTIVE 93/109/EC 
POSSIBILITIES FOR PARTICIPATION BY NATIONAL VOTERS LIVING ABROAD - EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS 1994 
Member State 
Belgium 
(voting compulsory) 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
(voting compulsory) 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
(voting compulsory) 
Netherlands 
Austria** 
Portugal 
Finland** 
Sweden** 
United Kingdom Citizens living in another EU MS 
130,000 
40,000 
290,000 
360,000 
470,000 
(of which 199,439 are enrolled in 
the Spanish electoral register) 
343,828 
c. 38,000 
(excluding 592,000 Irish citizens 
resident in the UK) 
1,200,000 
11,000 
240,000 
220,000 
Almost 840,000 
(including 87,307 registered) 
150,000 
57,000 
ca. 600,000 (excluding residents in 
the Republic of Ireland) Citizens residing in another IMS and voting for candidates of the MS of origin by 
correspondence, by proxy or at local embassies and consulates 
Yes, by correspondence, in consulates, following specific request. Art 1 (2) (I). 1,162 
Belgian citizens made use of this possibility for the 1994 EP elections. 
Yes, in embassies and consulates. Registration in electoral roll upon request. 
Yes, by correspondence 
Yes, in embassies and consulates. 47,947 voted for Greek candidates. 
Yes. Approximately 50,000 Spanish citizens made use of this possibility for the 1994 EP 
elections. 
Yes, in consulates. 17,139 French citizens made use of this possibility for the 1994 EP 
elections. 
No, except lor postal voting for diplomats and their spouses posted abroad. 
Yes, in embassies and consulates 
Yes by correspondence. Art l( 1 ) (4) 
Yes. Y 6 1 
Yes. 
Yes. By correspondence. DL 95-C/76. Registration in electoral roll is not compulsory but 
necessary to vote, hi the 1994 elections, 20,844 Portugese citizens made use of this 
possibility. 
Yes, in embassies and consulates. 
Yes, in embassies and consulates and by correspondence for Swedish citizens living in 
Germany. 
Yes, by proxy, if they had not been absent from the UK for more than 20 years Citizens resident in another EU 1 
MS that opted to vote in their MS 
of residence for candidates of their 
MS of residence 
estimate between 5,000 and 6,000 
3,580 
24,708 
10,510 
4,571 
16,300 
1,899 
(excluding Irish citizens resident in 
the UK) 
54,000 
no data available 
no data available 
Not applicable ** 
16,219 
Not applicable ** 
Not applicable ** 
no data available 
* Information provided by the Member States 
** Austria, Finland and Sweden acceded to the EU on 01.01.1995, and did not participate in the 1994 EP elections. 
TABLE 3* 
VA) 
Û IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/109/EC 
». 
PRESENTATION OF NON-NATIONAL EU CANDIDATES - EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS 1994 
Member 
State 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain Deadline for 
registration as 
candidate 
1. 4. 94 
4 weeks before 
election 
66 days before 
election for 
Lander list and 
68 days before 
election for the 
Bund list 
(Federal 
Parliament) 
at latest 10 days 
after the 
announcement of 
the elections 
4.-9.5.1994 Conditions to be fulfilled 
For application 
21 years 
lists presented by 5 elected 
representatives (all confounded) or 
supported by 5.000 voters 
18 years 
lists presented by parlies that arc 
represented in national Parliament 
or EP or supported by a number of 
voter equivalent to 2% of the valid 
votes cast in the previous general 
election. 
18 years. Lists may be presented by 
political parlies or associations. 
Lists of parties or politicial 
associations which arc not 
represented with at least 5 elected 
members in the EP. Bundestag or 
Landtag need respectively 4.000 
signatures (lists for the Bund) and 
in case of the lists fcr the Land 
signatures of 1/1000 of the 
registered voters of the Lander with 
a maximum of 2.000 authorised 
voters. 
25 years. 
18 years 
List presented by a parly, coalition 
or a federation, supported by 
15.000 voters or 50 elected 
representatives (Art 220 (4)) Financing 
private 
private 
partly State financing of 
political parties and 
associations. Reimbursement of 
parts of cost if mprc than 0.5 % 
of total number of voles is 
obtained (1 DM per vote) 
private 
partly public 3.000,000 pis per 
seal, 100 pis per vote if at least 
one scat gained - Art. 2271y2). 
Electoral mailing is also 
financed bv the State. Sanctions for standing 
twice 
8-15 days imprisonment 
and fine of 26 -200 FB (Art 
1 law 23.3.1989 as 
amended) 
Fine. The election of the 
candidate who stood twice 
is declared void. 
Imprisonment for up to 3 
years or fine 
Imprisonment 6 months -
5 years and barred from 
public office 2-5 years as 
provided for in Article 63 
Penal Code and Art. 32 of 
Presidential Decree 
92/1994. 
As a falsehood in a public 
document: Imprisonment 
from 6-8 years and fine of 
100.000 to 1.000,000 pis EU 
candidates 
18 
(out of 534) 
1 
12 
Not available 
1 Successful 
EU 
candidates 
none 
none 
1 
none 
none 
VA) France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Austria ** 
Portugal 27.5.1994 
7-14.5.1994 
39 days before 
election 
60 days before 
election 
27.4.1994 
6.9.1996 
4-18.4.1994 23 years. 100,000 FF deposit 
(reimbursed if list obtains more 
than 5% of the votes) 
21 years. 1,000 IEP deposit 
(reimbursable if candidate obtains 
1/3 of votes necessary to win) 
25 years.Lists presented by political 
groups or parties represented in one 
of the two chambers, or support by 
30,000 voters in the constituency. 
Since 1979 all EU citizens may 
stand as candidates 
21 years 
list presented by 250 voters, or an 
MEP, or a national MP. 
List must not contain more than 50 
% of non-national members 
18 years 
10 signatures of voters and 25,000 
NLG deposit. No more than 30 
candidates per list 
19 years of age before January 1st 
of the year of the elections. 
Candidates may be nominated by 
political parties, by 3 members of 
the Federal Parliament, by 1 
Austrian MEP or by 2.600 
registered voters 
18 years. List presented by political 
party or coalition of political parties 
only. partly public 
private 
partly public 
partly public if list obtains more 
than 5% of votes 
private 
Each political party which is 
represented in the EP is entitled, 
on request to a contribution to 
its campaign costs, after the 
election has taken place (Sec 2B 
Party Act) 
private or from political party 
funds (Lei 72/93). The election of a candidate 
who stood twice is declared 
void. 
Fine for false declaration on 
nomination paper not 
exceeding 500 IEP and/or 
imprisonment not 
exceeding 6 months 
For false declaration: 
imprisonment up to 3 years 
25,000/750,000 FL fine 
standing twice: 
imprisonment up to 1 
month, fine up to 5,000 
NLG 
For false declarations fine 
up to OS 3,000 or 
imprisonment up to two 
weeks (Section 31(6) of the 
European Elections Order) 
100 days financial penalty 
and 2 years imprisonment 
For false declarations: 
accessory penalty: loss of 
passive voting rights for the 
following elections. (Art. 14 
A Lei 14/87) 5 
None 
(excluding 
British 
citizens) 
2 
8 
(out of 120) 
2 
(out of 246) 
none 
none none 
none 
(excluding 
British 
citizens) 1 
none 
none 
none 
none 
none 
w ^ Finland** 
Sweden** 
United 
Kingdom 31 days prior to 
election (i.e. 19 
September 1996) 
16 junc 1996-
for registered 
parties-
otherwise names 
may be entered 
on ballot papers 
for as long as 
ballot paper can 
be printed in 
lime for polling 
dav 
17.2-29.3.1994 
(prolongation 
until 22.4.94) 18 years of age by election day 
Political parlies (max 16 
candidates), consituency 
associations formed by 1.000 
persons (max 1 candidate) 
Electoral alliances between parties 
and common lists of constituency 
associations (max 16 candidates) 
18 years of age by polling day 
No particular restrictions on 
nomination of candidates 
21 years. 
deposit of 1.000 GBP 
30 electors in support partly public before the elections 
to parties represented in 
Parliament and to certain 
citzens' organisations 
private contributors as well 
public: Sum of SKR 30 million 
divided between the parties 
represented in the Swedish 
Riksdag 
private Double candidature: fine or 
a maximum of two years 
imprisonment 
For false declarations: 
Votes cast for candidate are 
declared null but party or 
common list proposing 
candidate benefits from 
them. 
False declarations: fine or 
term of imprisonment not 
exceeding six months 
No penalty for double 
candidature. 
False statement in 
particular: Fine not 
exceeding ! .,000 GBP. 
Serious offences. Standing 
twice: fine not exceeding 
5.000 GBP and prison 
sentence up to 6 months. none (out of 
207) 
2 (oui of 577) 
2 (out of 545) none 
none 
none 
Information provided by the Member States 
* Sweden held its first EP elections on 17 September 1995, Austria on 13 October and Finland on 20 October 1996 
TABLE 4* POLITICAL PARTICIPATION OF NON-NATIONAL EU CITIZENS PRIOR TO ELECTIONS 
Member State 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
G recce 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
The Netherlands 
Austria Can non-nationals found a 
political party? 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes. non-nationals may co-found 
a party. However, it will loose its 
parly status if the majority of its 
members or the members of the 
Board arc foreigners. 
No 
Y'cs. Although the law on 
political parties of 1978 
recognises this right for Spanish 
nationals only, it is considered to 
be unconstitutional. 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes 
The Constitution gives the right 
of association only to nationals 
but in practice non-nationals also 
benefit. 
Yes 
Yes Can non-nationals join a 
political party? 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes. when allowed by the statutes 
of the party. 
At the discretion of the political 
party 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes 
Yes Is there a quota 
restriction? 
No 
No 
Yes: Both political parties and 
their Boards may not have more 
than 50% of non-nationals as 
members. Article 2 (3) Parly 
Law. For the European elections 
other political associations are 
considered as political parties 
and for these there is no quota. 
no data available 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No Other 
restrictions? 
None 
None 
Yes. Political activity of 
foreigners may be subject to 
restrictions, under certain 
conditions. Articles 6 and 37 of 
Foreigners Law 
no data available 
The internal structure and the 
operations of political parties 
should be democratic (Article 6 
of the Constitution) 
No 
None 
None 
A list of candidates may not be 
composed of a majority of non-
nationals (Art 106 (5), law 
25.2.79) 
Non-nationals may only stand for 
elections to the EP and local 
authorities. 
No 
Portugal 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom Article 15 of the Constitution 
gives political rights to nationals 
only. These arc extended to non-
nationals EU citizens (for EP and 
municipal elections on the basis 
of reciprocity).The Law on poli­
tical parties (DL 595/74) docs 
not envisage the forming of 
political parties by non-nationals. 
The reform of these provisions is 
currently featured in the Govern­
ment's legislative programme. 
Yes, if they reside in Finland and 
are over 15 years of age 
Yes 
Yes Yes at the discretion of political 
parties. Main political parties 
have non-national members 
Yes, if they reside in Finland 
Yes 
Yes No 
No 
No 
No Polling stations may not be 
composed exclusively by non-
nationals. Art 9° B Lei 14/87( to 
avoid polarisation) 
None 
None 
None 
* Information provided by the Member States 
TABLE 5* IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/109/EC 
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE'S OPTIONS BY MEMBER STATES 
Member State 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands ART 7 §1: The MS of residenee may 
check whether non-nationals who have 
expressed a desire to exercise their right to 
vote there have not been deprived of that 
right in their home MS through an 
individual civil or criminal law decision. 
Yes. Art 3 bis L (d'office) 
No 
Yes. Art 6a § 2 Nr 2 EU WG in 
relation with Art. 17 a §5 Eu WO. 
(when necessary, in case of 
doubt) 
Yes, after the exchange of the 
necessary information with the 
other MS (Art 6 Law 2196/94. 
Yes. Art,3 d) RD (when 
necessary) 
Yes 
No 
No 
No 
No. ART 9 §3 : The MS of residence may also 
require a Community voter to: a) state that 
he has not been deprived of the right to vote 
in his home MS; b) produce a valid identity 
document; c) indicate the date from which 
he has been resident in that State or in 
another MS. 
a) Yes. Art 1 §3, 2, 2° Loi 23 
mars 
b) No 
c)No 
No. 
a) Yes. Art.6 § 2 Nr 2 ELTWin 
relation to 17a(4) Eu WO 
b) Yes. 
c) Yes 
a) Yes. Art 4 §3 a) 
b) Yes. Art 4 §3 b) 
c) Yes. Art 4 §3 c) 
a) Yes. Art3§ld)RD. 
b) Yes. Art 3 § 2 RD 
c)No 
a) Yes. Art 2 §4 
b)Yes 
c)No 
No 
a) Yes. Art2 $2 - preferably 
presenting a certificate. 
b)No 
c)No 
a) Yes. Art 1, (2) 1° d) 
b) Yes. Art 1,(2) 2° 
c) Yes . Art I. (2) 3° 
a) Yes. Y33 I 
b)No 
c)No ART 10 § 3 : The MS of residence may 
require a Community national entitled to 
stand as candidate to produce a) valid 
identity document ; b) state the date from 
which he has been a national of a MS. 
No 
No 
a) Yes. 11 §2 Nr lb-Id Eu WG 
b) Yes. 11 § 2 Nr lb-Id EuWG 
a) Yes. Art 5 §2. 
b) Yes. Art 5 §2. 
a) Yes. Art 220 bis §2 LO 
b) Yes. Art 220 bis §2 LO 
No 
No. 
No 
a) Yes. Art 98 (2°) 
b)No 
No ART 14 § 1 : If the proportion of eligible 
non nationals exceeds 20% of eligible 
voters, derogation to conditions of access to 
vote and to candidatures are possible. 
ART 14 § 2 : If national law allows non-
nationals to vote for national Parliament 
elections, Art 6-13 are not applicable to 
them. 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
Yes for resident British citizens 
only 
No 
No 
Yes,§l. Art 106 (5) 
No 
No 
No 
Austria 
Portugal 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom No 
No 
Yes (when necessary) 
No 
No a)Yes : Section 5(1) WEG 
b) Yes 
c)No 
a) Yes Art 20 (9 -d) Lei 69/78 
(RE) 
b) Yes. Art 20 (3) (RE). 
c)No 
a) Yes when necessary 
b)No 
c)No 
No 
No a) No 
b)No 
a) Yes, art 24, lei 14/79 
b)No 
No 
No 
No No 1 
No 1 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
No 
Yes. For Irish citizens only 
Information provided by the Member States 
TABLE 6* IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/109/EC 
TRANSPOSITION MEASURES IN THE MEMBER STATES 
Member Directive implemented by: 
State 
Belgium Loi du 11.4.94 modifiant la Loi du 23 mars 1989 relative à l'élection du PE et portant 
exécution de la directive du Conseil des Communautés Européennes 93/109 du 6.12.93 in 
MB n° 10288 du 16.4.94 
Denmark Lov nr. 1086 af 22.12.93 om aendring af lov nr. 746 af 7.12.1988 om valg af danske 
repraesentanter til Europa-Parlamentet (L); Indenrigsministeriets bekendtgofelse nr. 79 af 
31.1.1994 om slettelse af den danske valgliste af personer, der er optaget pâ valglisten i en 
anden medlemsstat (N79); Indenrigsministeriets bekendtgerelse nr. 80 af 31.1.1994 om EU-
borgeres optagelse pâ valglisten til valg til Europa-Parlamentet (N80); Lov af 13.1.1997 om 
asndring af lov om valg af danske repraesentanter til Europa-Parlamentet. 
Germany Drittes Gesetz zur Anderung des Europawahlgesetzes von 8.3.94, BGBI1994,1, p. 419, 
12.3.1994, Zweite Verordnung zur Anderung der Europawahlordnung von 15.3.94, BGBI 
1994,1, p.544, von 19.03.1994 
Greece NôuoçaptG. 2196 rqç 22MapTiou 1994, ETtioriun, E(pT]pEp(ôa TT|Ç eXXtiviKf|ç KupépvT|ar]ç, 
TÔUQÇ 1 oeipd 41 Tnç 22 Map-riou 1994 KQI npoeSpucé ôttiTayua api8. 60/1994 (49 A) 
Spain Ley Organica 13/94 de 30.3.94, BOE n° 77,102259 de 31.3.94 (LO); Real Decreto 2118/93 
de 3.12.93, BOE n° 290, 34662 de 4.12.94 (RD); Orden del Ministerio de Economia y 
Hacienda 30393 de 20.12.1993, BOE n° 305 de 22.12.1993 (O.30) e Orden del Ministerio de 
Economia y Hacienda de 28.1.94, BOE n° 25 de 29.1.94 (O.20). Real Decreto 157/1996 de 
2.2.1996 por el que se dispone la actualizacion mensual del censo electoral y se regulan los 
datos necesarios par la inscripcion en el mismo modificado con Ley Organica 1/1997 de 
__ 30.5.1997, BOE n° 130 de 31.5.97 
France Loi n° 94-104 du 5 février 1994 relative à l'exercice par les citoyens de l'Union Européenne 
résidant en France du droit de vote et de l'éligibilité au Parlement Européen (L); Décret n° 
____ 94-206 du 10 mars 1994 pris pour l'application de la loi 94-104 du 5 février 1994 (D). 
Ireland European Parliament Elections (Voting and Candidature) Regulations 1994 of 31.12.1994; 
European Parliament Elections Act 1993, Electoral Act 1992; European Assembly Elections 
Acts 1977 and 1984, Statutory Declarations Act 1938; European Parliament Elections Act 
1997 
Italy Decreto Legge n° 128 del 21.2.1994, GU n° 47 del 26.2.1994 reiterato dal DL n° 408 del 
24.6.94 convertito dalla Legge n° 483 del 3.8.1994, GU n° 183 del 6.8.1994 
Luxembourg Loi du 28 janvier 1994 fixant les modalités de l'élection des représentants du Grand Duché 
de Luxembourg au Parlement Européen. 
The Wet van 26 januari 1994 houdende wijziging van de Kieswet ter uitvoering van richtlijn n. 
Netherlands 93/109/EG van 6.12.93 tot vaststelling an de wijze van uitoefening in de Lid-staat van 
verblijf van het actieve en passieve kiesrecht bij de verkiezingen van het europese parlement, 
Staatsblad 1994,58. 
Austria Bundesgesetz tiber die Wahl der von Osterreich zu entsendenden Abgeordneten zum 
Europâischen Parlament (Europawahlordnung - EuWO, BGBI. Nr 117/1996) 
Bundesgesetz Uber die Fiihrung stândiger Evidenz der Wahl - und Stimmberechtigten bei 
Wahlen zum Europâischen Parlament (Europa-Wàhlerevidenzgesetz - Eu WEG, BGBI. Nr 
118/1996) 
Portugal Lei 3/94 de 28.2.94 (RE); Lei 4/94 de 9.3.94 (PE), Diario da Republica Série A n° 57 de 
9.3.94 
Finland Laki Suomesta Euroopan parlamenttiin valittavien edustajien vaaleista (272/95) 3.3.1995 
Sweden Lag om val till Europaparlamentet utfardad den 20 april 1995, SFS 1995:374 (repealed) 1 
kap. 4, 8 och 13 §, 5 kap. 16 och 18 §, 7 kap. 5 och 12 § vallagen (SFS 1997:157) 
United European Parliamentary Elections (Changes to the Franchise and Qualification of 
Kingdom Representatives) Regulations 1994 of 17.2.1994 
* Information provided by the Member States 
3^ 
TABLE 7* 
DEADLINES FOR APPLICATION TO ENTER INTO THE ELECTORAL ROLL 
In accordance to Article 9 (4) of Directive 93/109, EU citizens resident in another Member State who 
registered as voters in their Member State of residence for the June 1994 EP elections will remain on 
the electoral roll under the same conditions as nationals until they request to be removed from it or 
until they are removed automatically because they no longer fulfill the necessary residence conditions. 
Other EU citizens wishing to vote in the Member State of residence in the next EP elections will have 
to request to be entered on the electoral roll. 
Below are indicated per Member State where and when the application must be submitted. 
Application to be entered on 
Member State the electoral roll to be Deadline 
submitted to: 
Any time of the year except between 1 April and 
Belgium municipality of residence polling day on election year. 
Deadline for next EP elections: 31 March 1999 
Denmark district of registered residence Not later than 6 weeks before polling day 
Germany municipality of residence At the latest 34 days before polling day 
Greece municipality of residence 1 -10/April of each year 
Deadline for next EP elections: 10 April 1999 
Spain municipality of residence At the latest 41 days before polling day 
France municipality of residence Last working day in December for definite 
registration in 1 March of the following year. Dead­
line for the next EP elections: 30 December 1998 
Ireland County or City Council of Applications can be made throughout the year, 
residence Deadline for next EP elections: 13 working days 
before polling day 
Italy municipality of residence At the latest 90 days before polling day 
Luxembourg municipality of residence By 1 April of each year. 
Deadline for next EP elections: 31 March 1998 
Netherlands municipality of residence Must be entered at the latest 42 days before polling 
day on the population register. 
For next EP elections: return form to municipality 
of residence at the latest 3 weeks before polling day 
Austria municipality of residence At the latest 65 days before polling day 
Portugal electoral board of municipality Between 2 and 31 May of each year. 
of residence Deadline for the next EP elections 31 May 1998 
Finland population registration office At the latest 66 days before polling day 
Sweden local tax office At the latest 30 days before polling day 
United local registration office (ERO) Must be resident in the UK by qualifying date 
Kingdom which is 10 October of any year and 1 September 
for NI. For next EP elections return form to local 
^ |_ ERO no later than 16 December 1998. 
* Information provided by the Member States 
3, S 


ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(97) 731 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 06 01 05 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-752-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-29910-3 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
33