WRITTEN QUESTION E-2476/99

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Complaint about harassment

On 20 November 1998 a national expert seconded to the Commission made a complaint to his superiors about harassment. The individual resubmitted his complaint on 4 December 1998.

Despite the Commission recommendations on the subject, no action was taken to protect the individual concerned.

On 25 February 1999 he was unfairly relieved of his duties and his request for the renewal of his contract, which was supported by the Commission, was rejected.

These facts appear to constitute a breach of the principles relating to the protection of victims laid down in the Commission recommendations.

The Commission only decided to launch an internal investigation procedure three months after the first complaint.

The procedure has still not been completed.

1. What is the official procedure for dealing with complaints about harassment within the Commission?

2. What measures may the Commission take to protect victims?

3. What sanctions may the Commission apply to those responsible for harassment?

4. What is the time limit for the completion of the internal procedures and what safeguards exist to ensure impartiality?

5. What measures are provided for to compensate the victims of harassment?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 2000)

A complaint of harassment lodged by a member of staff of the Commission can lead to an administrative inquiry decided on by the competent Appointing Authority (AA). The Commission provided specific information to its staff concerning procedures relating to the protection of the dignity of the person, in an administrative notice dated 29 February 1996. The purpose of the administrative inquiry is to establish the existence of the facts and may lead to disciplinary proceedings against a person found to be responsible.

Measures can be taken to protect the victim of the harassment by his or her hierarchy, such as a transfer to another post whilst the inquiry is being carried out.

Disciplinary proceedings are initiated by the appointing authority on request of the hierarchy of the person concerned or on its own initiative. They may lead to the imposition of a sanction as laid down in the Staff Regulations.

During the phase of administrative inquiries no time limits apply. In the event that disciplinary proceedings are opened according to the decision of the appointing authority, the Commission has depending on the individual case to obey the time limits provided for in Article 87 and Annex IX of the Staff Regulation.

In order to determine the appropriate sanction the AA has to establish all facts in respect of the person being subject to a disciplinary proceeding and is therefore entitled and obliged to eliminate all doubts.

The AA, can take a decision without an opinion from the disciplinary board in cases of disciplinary measures such as a written warning or a reprimand, but must consult the disciplinary board to take other measures. The AA takes a final decision after the disciplinary board has delivered its opinion.

Article 7(3) of Annex IX of the Staff Regulations provides that the appointing authority must take its decision within one month from the delivery of the reasoned opinion of the disciplinary board; it shall first hear the official concerned.

However, the case law of the Court of Justice and of the Court of First Instance states that the time limits laid down in Article 7(3) are not mandatory but are only rules of good administration.

Disciplinary proceedings are subject to the principle of the presumption of innocence. The regularity and the impartiality of the entire procedure are under the control of the Court of First Instance.

As to compensation for victims of harassment, the institution may be liable to compensate them where damage is proved to have resulted from a service-related fault of the institution.