WRITTEN QUESTION P-0906/02

by Karla Peijs (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Discrimination against foreigners in the Belgian system of traffic fines

Last year I asked the Commission about discrimination against foreigners in relation to speeding fines in Belgium (E-0830/01)(1). In its answer, the Commission said it would have to analyse the Belgian legislation in detail before taking a position. A year later, the situation is still the same, if not worse.

The Belgian government has increased the amount for the out-of-court settlement of speeding offences significantly (EUR 200 fine for every 10 km in excess of the speed limit). This is for foreigners. The corresponding amount for Belgians is still expressed in Belgian francs and cannot therefore be collected at all as francs are no longer legal tender. This situation is unacceptable. Last year the Belgian government announced that this matter was not one of its priorities. Following the recent reform, I am forced to conclude that it is only traffic offences committed by foreigners that are a priority and this constitutes a new form of discrimination. With a view to the White Paper on transport, in which the Commission aims to harmonise penalties and checks, one wonders whether it is not time to call the Belgian government to account. Things are going too far. I anticipate that the Commission's analysis of Belgian legislation will support my complaint and I would ask the Commission now to take action.

It has since come to my attention that there has been a judgment (C-224/00) in a similar case in Italy, to which the Commission referred in its answer. Under this judgment, the Italian government may no longer discriminate against people with foreign number plates. Is it not time for the European Commission to draw up an inventory of legislation on fines in the various Member States and examine whether there is also discrimination against foreigners in other countries? This matter causes citizens a great deal of annoyance and inconvenience and casts doubt on the effectiveness of the Union.

(1) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001, p. 129.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 2002)

On the basis of the information available to the Commission, Belgian legislation relating to the collection and deposit of fines for road traffic offences makes a distinction between resident and non-resident offenders. The former can opt to pay the fine immediately or within a period set by the King, while the latter must pay the amount demanded immediately or deposit the amount plus an increase to cover legal costs.

As far as the Commission is aware, the amounts of the fines provided for in the legislation to which the Honourable Member refers have not been changed since January 1998. Article 1 of the Royal Decree of 10 June 1985 relating to the collection and deposit of fines in the event of an infringement of the road traffic regulations, as amended by the Royal Decree of 24 October 1997, which came into force on 1 January 1998, made provision for a fine of BEF 8 000 (equivalent to EUR 200) for exceeding the maximum authorised speed limit by between 10 km and 21 km an hour, where the offender does not have a domicile or fixed residence in Belgium. The Royal Decree of 10 June 1985 has since been amended by the Royal Decrees of 19 July 2000 and 11 December 2001, with fines being converted into euros without increasing their amount. Fines imposed on residents under the legislation relating to road traffic regulations (Royal Decree of 16 March 1968) have been converted into euros under the Law introducing the euro in connection with the matters referred to in Article 78 of the Constitution of 26 June 2000 and are collected in euros.

As the Commission has already stated in its answer to Written Question E-0830/01 by the Honourable Member(1), the Court of Justice has ruled in the Pastoors case(2) that, in the absence of instruments to enforce a judgment in a Member State other than the one in which it had been delivered, there were objective grounds for treating resident and non-resident offenders differently and that a Member State could require only non-resident offenders to lodge a security if, in the case of an offence, they choose criminal proceedings rather than opt to pay a fine immediately.

The Commission is completing its examination of Belgian legislation in the light of the recent judgment (19 March 2002) in Case C-224/00 Commission v Italy, which concerns Italian legislation governing the same subject, before it can decide whether or not it is compatible with Community law.

One of the reasons that has led the Belgian authorities to distinguish between residents and non-residents is the difficulty in having a fine imposed by a Belgian court enforced in another Member State. In this connection, the Commission would draw attention to the initiative of France,

Sweden and the United Kingdom aimed at adopting of a Council Framework Decision on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties(3). The proposed Framework Decision provides that a fine imposed by a court in one Member State must be recognised and enforced in other Member States. Fines imposed for road traffic offences by Member States are often administrative penalties rather than criminal penalties. If the Framework Decision were to cover administrative fines, and this issue is currently being discussed, it should go a long way towards resolving the problem of cross-border enforcement of fines and thus eliminate the need for differential treatment of residents and non-residents.

(1) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001.

(2) Case C-29/95 [1997] ECR I-285.

(3) OJ C 278, 2.10.2001.