WRITTEN QUESTION P-0863/02

by Herman Vermeer (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 March 2002)

Subject: Disproportionate and discriminatory system of fines for road traffic offences in Belgium

Further to the written question on fines for road traffic offences in the EU (E-0830/01)(1) tabled to you by my colleague Karla Peijs on 20 March 2001, I wish to draw your attention to the following.

In the answer that you gave in May 2001 to the question referred to above, you said that the Commission intended to analyse the Belgian legislation in detail before taking a position on the compatibility of Belgian legislation with Community law.

Since then, the situation for road users not resident in Belgium has deteriorated. Fines for exceeding the speed limit by 10 kph were recently increased by the Belgian Government to EUR 200. Residents may claim a reduction of some EUR 60 from that amount. Non-residents must pay the entire amount. Apart from the fact that fines for non-residents are denominated in euros, while those for residents are denominated in Belgian francs (which now no longer exist) which means, in the case of residents, that collection of the fine becomes more unlikely non-residents are required to pay the fine on the spot. That procedure is laid down in the Royal Decree of 10 June 1985.

The question remains as to the extent to which that procedure is compatible with European Union law and the principle of non-discrimination enshrined therein. Is it not time to bring infringement proceedings against the Belgian authorities? The fact that such distinctions are drawn breaches the concept of European citizenship introduced by the Treaty of Maastricht. What is more, the exorbitant amount of the penalties flouts the principle of proportionality confirmed by the case-law of the European Court of Justice. In its White Paper on Transport, the Commission said that it intended to harmonise penalties and controls in the EU. I therefore call on it to investigate this situation as a matter of urgency.

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

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(29 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.

The Court of Justice ruled in the Pastoors case(1) 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 must complete 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 the United Kingdom, France and Sweden aimed at adopting a Council Framework Decision on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties(2). The proposed Framework Decision provides that a fine imposed in one Member State must be recognised and enforced in other Member States. In some Member States the fines imposed for road traffic offences are administrative penalties rather than criminal penalties.

If the Framework Decision were to cover administrative fines, and this issue is currently being discussed, it should in large part resolve the problem of cross-border enforcement of fines and thus eliminate the need for differential treatment of residents and non-residents.

With regard to proportionate fines, the Honourable Member is referred to the answer given by the Commission to Written Question P-3092/00 by Ms Kauppi(3): While the Commission is generally of the opinion that fines should be proportionate to the severity of the offence for which they were imposed, it must be acknowledged that it is very difficult to determine in individual cases whether this criterion has been met or not. Different Member States may have different sets of values and what would appear proportionate in one Member State may be seen as disproportionate in another.

The Commission is aware of the fact that there are significant differences among Member States in relation to fines for speeding offences. There is no legislation at Union level that sets maximum amounts to be imposed in such cases.

As regards the White Paper on European transport policy, the Commission is indeed currently examining what would be the most effective way of harmonising certain sanctions and controls (particularly as regards speeding and drink-driving).

(1) Case C-29/95 [1997] ECR I-285 (judgment given on 23.1.1997).

(2) OJ C 278, 2.10.2001.

(3) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001.