WRITTEN QUESTION E-3598/01

by Ilka Schröder (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: So-called troublemaker letters from the police to persons deemed likely to take part in protests against the Laeken Summit

According to media reports, e.g. in the issue of the Berliner Zeitung of 10 December 2001, during the first half of December, in the run-up to the Laeken Summit, persons in a number of German Länder deemed likely to take part in protests against the summit were warned not to leave the country or even prevented from so doing. For example, in Baden-Württemburg individuals were banned from leaving the country and required to report to the police, and in Berlin passports and identity cards were withdrawn.

In Göttingen, the police sent persons presumed to be anti-EU protesters a document headed troublemaker letter. The letter urges the recipient not to take part in demonstration-like events during the period from 13 to 15 December 2001, stating that only in this way could the person concerned avoid police measures in the context of risk prevention (up to and including a ban on crossing into Belgium from Germany) or criminal proceedings in response to offences committed during such events. The Göttingen police authority referred to a file on violent offenders, set up in November 2000, as the basis for the measures.

In the light of previous answers to Members' questions, it should be pointed out that the protests were to take place in connection with an EU Summit. Since there is no such thing as a European police force, the relevant police measures are carried out by national or regional forces.

Should the Commission not feel responsible for the issues raised below, could it please give reasons in each case:

- Is the Commission aware of the legal basis which the German authorities have used in setting up this file which clearly includes details of persons who must be regarded as innocent of any offence?

- What view does the Commission take of this restriction on individuals' fundamental rights, which represents, for example, a breach of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Articles 11 and 12 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

- This practice prevents people from exercising their fundamental rights as European citizens. What steps does the Commission plan to take in order to put a stop to this practice?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2002)

The questions raised by the Honourable Member primarily concern the compatibility with Community law of measures restricting freedom of movement taken by one Member State on the grounds of public policy.

The right to move and reside freely in the territory of another Member State is a fundamental right conferred directly on each citizen of the Union by the Treaty establishing the European Community (EC). However, limitations may be placed on this right on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health.

The measures taken by the Member States on the grounds of public policy must be assessed in the light of Directive 64/221/EEC(1) and the case law of the Court of Justice. Limitations on the rights guaranteed by the EC Treaty imposed in the interests of public policy and public security must not exceed what is necessary to safeguard these interests(2).

It is for the national authorities to assess the specific situation and then take appropriate measures that are compatible with Community law. The measures taken to protect public policy and public security must, in particular, be applied in accordance with the principle of proportionality. Proportionality requires there to be a justification for the measure, a proper balance between the measure implemented and the objective being pursued and a balance between the interests of the individual and those of the State concerned.

With regard to the creation of files, the Member States are authorised to use data for the purpose of protecting public policy, public security or public health in connection with measures covered by Directive 64/221/EEC, provided that the provisions on data protection are fully observed. This means, for example, that personal data must be accurate, relevant and not excessive and must be used solely for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes.

(1) Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the coordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which are justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health (OJ B 56, 4.4.1964).

(2) Case 36/75 Rutili [1975] ECR II-1219.