WRITTEN QUESTION E-0311/96 by Irini Lambraki (PSE) to the Commission (15 February 1996)

Subject: Bringing the third pillar within the Community domain with the revision of the Treaty in view

The Council document entitled 'Draft revision of the Treaties establishing the European Union' states that in accordance with the objectives set out in Articles A and B of the EU Treaty, the Intergovernmental Conference will examine those provisions for which revision is provided pursuant to Article N(2) of the Treaty.

Given that the provisions on cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs do not provide for their revision by the Intergovernmental Conference, how does the Commission explain its proposal to wait until the IGC before considering the application of Article K.9?

It seems unlikely on this basis that the provisions of the third pillar will be brought within the Community domain at the IGC. Would not failure to apply Article K.9 in the meantime constitute a waste of valuable time in bringing Europe closer to its citizens?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (27 March 1996)

The Commission would draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that Article B of the Treaty on European Union says that the Union's objectives include 'considering, through the procedure referred to in Article N(2), to what extent the policies and forms of cooperation introduced by this Treaty may need to be revised with the aim of ensuring the effectiveness of the mechanisms and the institutions of the Community'. This is why the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, in their reports to the reflection group chaired by Mr Westendorp, who cites them in his final report, considered that cooperation under Title VI of the Treaty should be one of the major items on the agenda for the Intergovernmental Conference.

As early as September 1995, the Commission expressed the view that, having regard to the need to ensure genuine progress as a positive response to citizens' expectations and anxieties, maximum effectiveness would be achieved by bringing all of the fields of justice and home affairs, except judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation, under the Community umbrella (particularly the first six listed in Article K.1, and customs cooperation).

This approach is fully confirmed in the Commission's opinion on the holding of the Intergovernmental Conference, which was adopted on 28 February 1996 and states that the Commission considers that, to remedy the inadequacies of the Treaty in the fields of justice and home affairs, the most logical answer would be to bring those fields into the Community framework, except for judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation.

This is the background for the Commission communication on the possible application of Article K.9 of the Treaty on European Union ((COM(95) 566 of 22.11.1995. )). In the communication in question, the Commission gave detailed consideration to the arguments which might be put forward in favour of each of the two options, i.e. using or not using Article K.9. It explained why that article did not at present seem to it to be the most appropriate instrument, not to say an impossible one. The procedure laid down is cumbersome and requires the Member States' unanimous approval and ratification in accordance with their respective national constitutional provisions. In one Member State this means that a national referendum will inevitably be triggered if Article K.9 is invoked.