WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1467/97 by Giovanni BURTONE to the Commission. Violation of Article 48 of the TEU (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1997-04-30
Institutions: BURTONE, European Parliament
Subjects: Sicily, Treaty on European Union, freedom to provide services, infringement of EU law, physician, recognition of diplomas, right of establishment, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91997E1467(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1467(01)

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1467/97 by Giovanni BURTONE to the Commission. Violation of Article 48 of the TEU (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)  


Official Journal C 323 , 21/10/1998 P. 0001 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1467/97 by Giovanni Burtone (PPE) to the Commission (30 April 1997)Subject: Violation of Article 48 of the TEUCommunity Directive 82/76/EEC ((OJ L 43, 15.2.1982, p. 21. )) laid down rules governing the training of specialist doctors with a view to harmonising professional standards and medical specializations throughout the Community. This directive was transposed by Italy by means of laws reforming the public health system and medical specialisation establishments (Article 15(3), DGLS, 517/93 DGLS 257/91).The Community legislation is intended to guarantee freedom of movement for Community specialists in medicine within the health services of the various Member States.A series of legislative and administrative provisions issued by Italian Central Government (DL 478/96, L 4/97) and the Sicily Region (DA 17.10.1996 and related administrative regulations) have seriously infringed the Community legislation and the aforementioned harmonisation principles. The Sicily Region has, on the basis of an ambiguous (and illegal, even within the Italian system) act confirming previously existing derogation mechanisms, filled posts in the medical sector relating to prevention services which, under the terms of the Community directive, may be allocated solely to persons holding a specialist diploma obtained from educational establishments organized according to the standards laid down by the directive in the various Member States.This entails an enormous waste of Community resources designed to finance specialist medical training (hygiene, paediatrics, etc.). It also represents a violation of the right of specialist doctors holding diplomas issued by European establishments in compliance with Community standards to fill medical posts in prevention services in the Sicily Region insofar as the Sicily Region has, by successive laws and administrative regulations, reserved all available posts in these medical services for doctors who do not hold the necessary Community title and specialization. This therefore constitutes a violation of the principle of freedom of movement for qualified Community doctors.Does the Commission agree that in view of the above-mentioned legislation and administrative regulations issued by the Italian Government and the Sicily Region, infringement proceedings should be instituted against the Italian State, pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty, for violation of Directive 82/76/EEC and Article 48(2) of the Treaty through the issuing of state legislation (DL 478/96, L 4/97) and legislative and administrative provisions of the Sicily Region (DA 17.10.1996)?Supplementary answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 April 1998)Further to the answer given on 21 May 1997 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 250. )), the Commission is now able to supply the following information.The Commission would stress that Directive 93/16/EEC to facilitate the free movement of doctors and the mutual recognition of their diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications ((OJ L 165, 7.7.1993. )), which incorporated the provisions of Directive 82/76/EEC, is not intended to harmonise standards applicable to the practice of the profession of doctor but simply to lay down minimum training requirements considered necessary and sufficient for the purposes of the mutual recognition of diplomas.Regarding the provisions of Title IV of Directive 93/16/EEC on specific training in general medical practice, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1142/95 from Mr Secchi ((OJ C 270, 16.10.1995. )).Given the information currently in its possession and in particular following the enquiries made of the Member State concerned, the Commission considers that the examination of the situation referred to by the Honourable Member does not bring to light anything that is contrary to Community law. However, if the Honourable Member knew of other information likely to justify a new investigation of the facts of his complaint, it would ask him to supply it.