WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1435/97 by Klaus-Heiner LEHNE to the Commission. Complaints Board of the European Schools
Date: 1997-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, LEHNE
Subjects: EU body, European school, appeal, appointment of staff, decision-making, human rights, operation of the Institutions, organisation of teaching, staff regulations (EU), teacher













EUR-Lex - 91997E1435 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1435

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1435/97 by Klaus-Heiner LEHNE to the Commission. Complaints Board of the European Schools  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0129 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1435/97 by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE) to the Commission (23 April 1997)Subject: Complaints Board of the European SchoolsThe (new) Service Regulations for staff of the European Schools were adopted by the Board of Governors in April 1996 and, in accordance with Article 89, entered into force on 1 September 1996. As a result of the foregoing, even though there is no explicit stipulation to that effect, the (old) Service Regulations for teaching staff and the conditions of employment for part-time teachers, laid down by the Board of Governors on 4/5 December 1967, have definitely been repealed.1. Have the implementing rules governing the proceedings of the Complaints Board, adopted pursuant to Article 45(2) of the old Service Regulations, by the same token, likewise been rendered invalid?2. If that is the case, and bearing in mind especially that the new Convention on the European Schools has not yet entered into force, what is the legal basis for the present composition of the Complaints Board, the members of which were appointed before 1 September 1996 but have taken decisions after that date? Do those decisions have legal force?Article 27 of the Convention awaiting ratification by the Member States and Article 80 of the new Service Regulations stipulate that the Complaints Board has sole jurisdiction in legal disputes concerning staff matters. As already mentioned, the new Service Regulations have been issued by the Board of Governors, a body without legislative authority, and have not been endorsed by the Member States. Unlike the Staff Regulations of EU Officials, they are not directly applicable, but should be regarded as internal rules which cannot overturn national law in force.3. What legitimacy does the Complaints Board therefore possess? Does the above provision deny staff all possibility of appeal to national (Belgian) or European courts? How does the Commission view the judgment handed down by the Brussels court exercising primary jurisdiction in an action instituted by a teacher against a European School?The members of the Complaints Board are appointed by the Board of Governors in accordance with Article 45(2) of the old Service Regulations. Leaving aside the fact that that legal basis has been removed, this means that the Board of Governors will continue to be both judge and defendant in legal disputes for as long as the Complaints Board has not been constituted as laid down in the new Convention and Service Regulations.4. Are the necessary guarantees in place with regard to the impartiality of judges, as required by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which applies in this instance?The staff of the European Schools have not been informed to date, or at any rate not fully informed, about the appointment of the Complaints Board.5. When did the Board's three-year term of office begin? Who are its substitute members, its vice-chairman, and its substitute rapporteur?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1997)The European Schools' Complaints Board was set up by the Board of Governors, which is the inter-governmental body responsible for the schools, to deal with disputes between teachers and the schools. As a member of the Board of Governors, the Commission can give the Honourable Member the following information:Article 80 of the new Service Regulations for staff seconded to the European Schools, which came into force on 1 September 1996, made small changes to the legal arrangements for the Complaints Board. This means that the rules of procedure for the Board of Governors, which it adopted at its meeting of 10 and 11 December 1981, remain in force, except for the rules amended by Article 80 referred to above. The Board of Governors felt justified in setting up the Complaints Board in line with the powers conferred on it by the convention of 12 April 1957 for its application. The jurisdiction of the Complaints Board is restricted to cases that fall within its competence.Since the Board of Governors, of which the Commission is a member, is a collective body, the Commission does not feel entitled to make statements on a matter which does not fall within its own remit.The renewable three-year term of office of the members of the Complaints Board was last renewed by the Board of Governors in December 1996 in accordance with the rules in force (see above). It is, therefore, inaccurate to claim that the members of the Complaints Board have acted without a legal basis or that the Board of Governors is both judge and defendant or that the impartiality of judges, as required by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, is not guaranteed.Since the appointment of the members of the Complaints Board is not a statutory act, but an administrative one, it does not have to be published for everyone to be informed. It is enough for the parties concerned to be notified. Be this as it may, it should be pointed out that staff representatives have always been provided with the minutes of the meetings of the Board of Governors where this information figures.The three members of the Complaints Board were appointed in August 1997 and their mandates were last renewed in December 1996. The substitute members appointed by the Board of Governors are Mr K. Sommer (Germany), Ms. O. Brelier (France) and Mr P. Stelios (Greece). The Complaints Board elects its chairperson for the whole term and a rapporteur for each complaint examined from among its members.