Second report from the Commission on citizenship of the Union
Date: 1997-05-27
Institutions: DG XV – Internal Market and Financial Services, European Commission
Subjects: European Ombudsman, European citizenship, Treaty on European Union, access to information, border control, civil rights, diplomatic protection, free movement of persons, fundamental rights, public awareness campaign

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 27.05.1997 
COM(97) 230 final 

SECOND REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

on Citizenship of the Union 

EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY 

Citizenship  of  the  Union  conferred  on 
nationals  of  all  Member  States  by 
the 
Maastricht Treaty is  meant to make the process 
of  European  integration  more  relevant  to 
their 
individual 
participation,  strengthening  the  protection  of 
their  rights  and  promoting  the  idea  of  an 
European identity. 

citizens  by 

increasing 

The  practical  benefits  that  it  engenders  are 
clearly additional to those arising from national 
citizenship  as  Union  citizenship  cannot  be 
acquired  or  for  that  matter  lost  without  the 
acquisition  or  the  loss  of the  nationality  of a 
Member State. 

The purpose of this second report, drawn up by 
the Commission in accordance with Article SE, 
is  to  assess  the  application  of  the  specific 
provisions  relating  to  citizenship of the  Union 
contained  in  Part  II  of the  Treaty  during  the 
years  1994-1996. 

During  this  time  progress  has  been  made 
towards  the  implementation  of  the  rights 
specificaHy related to citizenship. The necessary 
legislative  framework  for  the  new  rights  has 
been  adopted.  This  said,  in  practice  some  of 
th~ rights  are not yet fully  applied. 

Voting :ights in  the Member State 
of residence 

The right to  take  part in European Parliament 
elections  is  a  reality  also  for  all  those  Union 
citizens who reside in a Member State of which 
they are not nationals. The same cannot be said 
of the right  to  participate in local  elections,  as 
some  Member  States  still  have  to  implement 
the relevant Directive. 

An  improvement in the participation of Union 
citizens  requires  efforts  on  the  part  of  the 
institutions and the Member States to  improve 
the information available  to citizens.  Although 
some  progress  should  be  registered  following 
such  initiatives  as  "Citizens  First",  further 
efforts should be deployed as closely as possible 
to  the  citizens  themselves.  Commitment  to 
improve  citizens'  participation  as  candidates 
should  be  made  focusing  on  promoting  their 
participation  in  the  political  life  of  the  host 
country. 

Consular and diplomatic protection 
in  third countries 

Rules  have  been  adopted  to  provide  consular 
protection to  Union citizens in  third countries 
where 
their  own  Member  State 
is  not 
represented. Similarly,  rules for the delivery of 
an Emergency Travel Document have also been 
agreed  to.  These  instruments  are  not  of the 
same  binding  nature  as  those  adopted  under 
EC  rules. 

Since  Member  States  have  not yet  introduced 
the  necessary  administrative  procedures  or 
change in their legislation, the right to consular 
and  diplomatic  protection  is  not  yet  fully 
implemented,  on the basis  of the provisions of 
the Treaty.  Nevertheless Member States pursue, 
on an  informal,  bilateral  basis,  the  application 
of  the  provisional  guidelines  agreed  in  May 
1993. 

The  right to petition the European 
Parliament and to apply to  the 
Ombudsman 

The long established  practice of the European 
Parliament of accepting petitions from  anyone 
resident  in a :Member State continues to  prove 
its worth as  an  important Hnk  between  citizens 
and  the  institutions.  From  the  end  of the  last 
legislature  (93/94)  to the first half of the 96/97 
parliamentary  year,  a  total  of  4.131  petitions 
were addressed to the European Parliament. 

The  First  European  Ombudsman  was 
appointed  on  12  July  1995.  Since  taking office 
to the end of December 1996 the Ombudsman 
has  received  1.140  complaints.  Given  that  he 
has been active for just over one year, an overall 
appraisal  of  the  impact  of  his  work,  on  the 
institutions  and  on  the  citizens  cannot yet  be 
made.  Nevertheless,  as  the  function  of  the 
Ombudsman is  to render the institutions more 
open  and  democratically  accountable,  his 
action has been an incentive for the institutions 
under  scrutiny 
inappropriate 
to  remedy 
administrative practices. 

• fJIIIIt' 

c: 
0 
c 
= 

CL 
.,.,.. 
.c 
:c ., 
N .,.. ., .... 

\.J 

• • • 

Freedom  of movement and of 
residence 

Citizens  still  face  difficulties  when  seeking  to 
exercise  their  rights  of  free  movement  and 
residence.  The  right  to  reside  in  another 
Member  State  is  still  subject  ·to  different 
provisions applicable  to  different categories of 
citizens  as  secondary  Community  law  is  made 
up of two Regulations and nine Directives. Yet a 
single  set  of  rules  which  would  clarify  the 
for  equitable 
existing 
application  may  not  be introduced  due to  the 
lack of common legal basis in the EC Treaty. 

law  and  provide 

At present, the only way to re-cast the secondary 
legislation  also  to  take  account  of  the  full 
implications  of the  introduction  of citizenship 
of the  Union seems  to  be  a  revision  of Article 
BA.  From  a  supplementary  legal  basis  it could 
be  upgraded  to  a  specific  legal  basis  apt  to 
revise 
the  complex  body  of  secondary 
legislation.  This  would  certainly  increase  the 
transparency  of  Community 
ease 
implementation  measures  and  increase  the 
citizens'  understanding of the rights effectively 
conferred. 

law, 

The  way  forward: improving 
awareness and access  to citizens 
rights 

The  introduction  of citizenship  of the  Union 
has raised citizens expectations as  to the rights 
they  expect  to  see  conferred  and  enforced. 
Citizens are entitled to be aware of these rights 
and to have  them honoured in practice by  the 
Member  States.  Otherwise  citizens  will  regard 
EU  citizenship as  a vague and distant concept. 
The  Commission  submits  that  the  present 
entitlements  could  be  further  reinforced 
through two  main lines of action : 

•  a 

permanent 

information 

effort 
guaranteeing  citizens  access  to  simple  and 
factual  information concerning their rights, 
and 

•  a  special  effort  on 

the  part  of  the 
Commission  and  Member  States  to  ensure 
that the rights are effectively enforced 

In  the  following  months,  the  Commission  will 
look  into  issues  linked  with  freedom  of 
movement of people in the light of the Report 
to  the 
by  the  High  Level  Panel  presented 
Commission  on  18  March  1997,  the  priority 
areas  indicated  in  the  Action  Plan  for  the 
Single  Market  and  of the  conclusions  of  the 
Intergovernmental Conference on the revision 
of the Treaties. The reactions from the Council 
and the European Parliament to this  report as 
well  as  the  feedback  from  the  Citizens  First! 
initiative  will  further  assist  the  Commission  to 
identify further steps that may be taken. 

...,. 

t 

I 

..... 
. 
.  .. . ... . 
... 
• '1  • ------------··------··--- -

c: 
0 
c 
:!) 

•  f/llllll' 

page 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6 

I.  THE NEW  RIGHTS  INTRODUCED  BY  THE TREATY  ON  EUROPEAN  UNION ...... 

. ............................................................... 7 

1.  The right to participate in elections for the European Parliament and in municipal 

elections in the Member State of residence........................... 

.. .............................................................................................................. 7 

1.1  Common principles  .................................................................................................................................................................................................. : ................... 7 

1. 2  The citizens reactions in the last European Parliament elections .............. .. 

. ................................... 9 

1.3  The application of Directive 94/80 to municipal elections held in  1996 ............................................ 9 

1.4  Improving the citizens' participation .......................................................................................................................................................... 10 

2.  consular and diplomatic protection in the making ................................................................................................................................ 11 

3.  Nonjudicial means of protecting citizens'  rights .................................................................................................................................. 12 

3.1  The right to petition the European Parliament ....................................................................................................................... 12 

3.1.1  The experience in the last three parliamentary years ............. .. 

.. ............................. 12 

3.2  The right to apply to  the European Ombudsman .................................. . 

.. ..................................................................... 13 

11.  THE RIGHTS  CONFERRED PRIOR TO THE TREATY  ON EUROPEAN  UNION  .................................................................................... 14 

4.  Right of free movement. .............................................................................................................................................................................. : ....................................... 14 

4.1  Article BA of the EC  Treaty:  right of entry and residence of citizens of the U nion .......... l4 

4.2.  Experience of the past three years ....................................................... .. 

............................................... 15 

4.3  Failure to revise  provisions on right of residence .............. . 

.. ...........................  16 

4.4  Need to revision of Article BA. .............................................. .. 

......................................................................................................... 17 

4.5  Article 7 A and elimination of controls on persons at internal frontiers ............................................. .l7 

Ill. 

THE WAY  FORWARD:  IMPROVING  AWARENESS  AND  ACCESS  TO CITIZENS  RIGHTS .......................................................... 18 

··- ----------·-"" :··--•· r  •~r  'r .• 

.  .. 

• • • 

"~' 

.; 

,_J 

• 

*  *  .. 

Introduction 
Citizenship  of  the  Union  conferred  on 
nationals of all Member States is meant to make 
the  process  of  European  integration  more 
relevant to the individual citizens by increasing 
the 
their 
protection  of their  rights  and  promoting  the 
idea of an European identity. 

strengthening 

participation, 

Today,  a  series  of general  rights  and  benefits 
derived  from  the  European  Union  are  being 
used and enjoyed by ever larger numbers of EU 
citizens,  notably as  a result of the development 
of the Single Market.  These include the rights 
to  work  and  buy  goods  and  services  in  other 
Member States  and  to  enjoy  greater choice  of 
goods  and  services  and  more  competitive 
prices, as well as guaranteed levels of consumer 
and health protection and equal opportunities 
in the workplace 

In  addition  to  these  general  rights,  Part  II  of 
the  EC  Treaty  contains  specific  provisions 
relating  to  citizenship  of  the  Union  and  lists 
seven different rights that are the subject of the 
present report. As  Union citizenship cannot be 
acquired  or  for  that  matter  lost  without  the 
acquisition  or  the  loss  of the  nationality  of a 
Member  State,  the  benefits  that  it  engenders 
are  clearly  additional  to  those  arising  from 
national  citizenship'.  They  may  be  grouped  in 
the following  four categories: 

•  a  personal  right  to  free  movement  and 
residence  subject  to  the  limitations  and 
conditions  laid  down  in  the  treaty  and 
secondary law; 

•  electoral rights in European Parliament and 
the  place  of 

in 

municipal  elections 
residence; 

•  protection  by  diplomatic  and  consular 
authorities  of any  Member  State  in  a  third 
country  where  the  citizen's  own  Member 
State is  not represented; 

•  access  to  non-judicial  means  of  redress, 
through  access  to  the  Ombudsman  and  a 
right to  petition the European Parliament. 

This diverse  set  of rights  is  subject to  different 
conditions.  Generally  speaking  the  rights 
stemming  from  citizenship  of  the  Union 
cannot,  for  instance,  be  invoked  in  domestic 
situations  which  are  purely  internal  to  a 
Member  State.  Some  of the  entitlements such 
as  the electoral  rights can only be exercised  in 
a Member State other than that of origin, whilst 
others such as  access  to  the Ombudsman or to 
petition the European Parliament are extended 
to  all  natural  and  legal  persons  residing  or 
having  their  registered  office  in  a  Member 
State. 

Yet  despite  certain  limitations,  in  practice  the 
introduction of a citizenship of the Union has 
raised citizens' expectations as to the rights that 
they  expect  to  see  conferred  and  protected 
especially when they move  to another Member 
State. 

These rights and the Union as  a whole,  will  be 
credible  in  the  eyes  of citizens  only  insofar  as 
they  can  be  applied  in  practice.  In  fart 
citizenship  of the  Union  can  only  pursue  thP 
objective  set  out  in  Article  B of the  Treaty:  to 
strengthen  the  protection  of  the  rights  and 
interests of the nationals of the Member States 
- if  the  entitlements  conferred  are  dearly 
known  and are enforceable.  Penalty for  failure 
is  that citizenship of the Union may  appear to 
be  a  distant  concept  for  citizens  engendering 
confusion  as  to  its  means  and  objectives  even 
fuelling anti-EU feelings. 

from 

decide 

provisions 

assessment, 

the  Council, 

The  purpose  of this  report,  drawn  up  by  the 
Commission  to  comply with  Article  8  E  (1)  of 
the  Treaty, 
is  to  assess  the  application  in 
practice  of Union  citizenship.  On  the  basis  of 
acting 
this 
unanimously  on  a  proposal 
the 
Commission and after consulting the European 
Parliament,  may 
to 
strengthen,  or  add  to,  the  rights  already 
conferred  which  may  be  adopted  by  Member 
States. In the meantime, issues relating to rights 
stemming  from  citizenship  of  the  Union  are 
also  in  the  process  of being  dealt  with  by  the 
Intergovernmental Conference for  the revision 
of the  Treaties.  This  report  however  does  not 
deal  with  the  protection  of  universal  human 
rights which is  one of the issues presently being 
Intergouvernmental 
discussed 
Conference. 

the 

by 

But  whether  new  rights  are  added  or. the 
present  ones  simply  reinforced,  citizens 
concerns  must  remain  at  the  forefront  of 
European 
if  a  closer  union 
between  the  people  of  Europe  is  ever  to  be 
achieved 

integration, 

This  second  report  on  citizenship  spans  the 
years  1994  to  19962  and  is  divided  into  three 
sections. The first one deals with the new rights 
introduced by  the Treaty  on European  Union. 
The second section reviews the rights already in 
the  establishment  of  a 
place,  prior 

to 

1  Member States retain full  competence to determine who  Is  to bP 
considered  their  own  nationals  for  Community  purposes 
Declaration  n"2  annexed  to  the  final  Act  of  theTreaty  on 
European Union 

'  The first  Commission  report on citizenship COM  (93)  702  final 

of 21  December  1993 

. 
. 

• 

• • • 
.. 
6 
• 
., 
*  •  * 

citizenship  of  the  Union  and  relating  to 
freedom  of  movement.  In  both  cases,  the 
entitlements  conferred  are  described,  the 
progress of their implementation analysed  and 

their effectiveness  examined.  Finally,  the third 
section  looks  forward  to  the ways  in which  the 
present  entitlements  may 
further 
reinforced. 

be 

I.  THE  NEW  RIGHTS 

INTRODUCED  BY  THE  TREATY 
ON  EUROPEAN  UNION 

Alongs!dc  the establishment of a citizenship of 
the  Union,  Part  II  of the  EC  Treaty conferred 
on citizens of the Union  the following  new set 
of rights: 

• 

• 

• 

the right to vote and to stand as a candidate 
in  European  Parliament  and  in 
local 

elections in the Member State of residence -
Article 8 B (1)  and  (2) 

the  right  to  diplomatic  and  consular 
assistance  in  countries  in  which  a  Union 
citizen's Member State  is  not  represented  -
Article BC 

the  right  for  the  Union  citizen  to  submit a 
petition to the European Parliament and to 
apply to the Ombudsman - Article 8 D 

1. The  right  to  participate in  elections  for  the European 
Parliament  and  in  municipal  elections  in  the  Member 
State  of residence 

1.1  Common principles 

Article  8 B of the  EC-Treaty  confers  on  Union 
citizens  resident  in  another  Member  State  of 
which  they  are  not  nationals  the  right  to 
participzte in  their Member State of residence, 
as  voters  or  as  candidates,  in  elections  to  the 
European  Parliament  and 
in  municipal 
elections. 

For  the  exercise  of  these  rights,  Council 
unanimously  acopted  in  1993  and  1994  two 
Directives containing detailed arrangements to 
be  implemented  by  Member  States:  Directive 
93/109 for  European Parliament elections and 
Directive  94/80/EC  for  municipal  elections3
• 
Although  both  these  instruments  contain 
provisions  specific  to  the  elections  to  which 
they  refer,  they  are  bound  by  the  following 
common principles: 

•  Ne  harmonization  of  electoral  laws  - Both 
directives  refrain  from  any  attempt  to 
harmonize  national  electoral  laws.  They 
mere!y introduce basic rules meant to allow 
non-nationals  to exercise  their rights,  in so 
far as possible, under the same conditions as 
nationals.  Their  provisions  do  not  hinder, 
for  instance,  preferential treatment already 
given  by  Member States  in favour  of some 
Union citizens only. Moreover, in the case of 
European  Parliament  elections,  Directive 
93/109  is  without  prejudice  to  Article  138 
(3)  on  the  introduction  of  an  uniform 
electoral procedure. 

.. · 

, ....... 
·:·· .. 
·· 

-......, 
·;·.,.. 
.c ., 

•  Freedom  of choice- Union citizens are free  to 
choose  whether  or  not  to  exercise  their 
rights in their Member State of residence. In 
the  case  of European  Parliament elections, 
due  to  the  prohibition on  double voting  in 
the  same  election,  this  implies  the  need  to 
opt between the Member State of residence 
and  that  of origin.  In  municipal  elections, 
voting  in  the  Member  State  of  residence 
does not automatically entail the loss  of the 
equivalent  right  in  the  Member  State  of 
origin:  it  is  up to Member States themselves 
to  regulate  the  conditions  under  which 
their  nationals  residing  outside 
their 
electoral  territory 
retain  their  electoral 
rights4

• 

•  Equal access to electoral rights - On the basis of 
the  principle  of  non-discrimination  EU 
citizens  are  to  benefit from  electoral  rights 
under  the  same  conditions  as  nationals  of 
the  State  of  residence,  provided  that  they 
by 
conditions 
fulfill 

imposed 

the 

3  Council Directive 93/109 of6 December  1993 in OJ  L329/34 of 
30.12.1993.  Council Directive 94/80 of 19 December 1994 in OJ 
L  368  of  31.12.1994,  recently  modified  by  Council  Directive 
93/60/EC  of  13  May  1996  In  OJ  L  122112  of  22.5.1996  to 
Include,  the references to  basic  local government units In 
the three new  Member States. 

•  Eleven MS  do not permit their own  nationals to vote or to stand 
If  they  reside  outside  their  territory.  Greek  and  Italian  voters 
Uving  abroad must travel  back to their country of origin to vote. 
Only  France  and Spain  allow  Its  citizens  resident abroad  retain 
their voting rights in full. 

• .. .  • 
.• 
.. 
•  7 
• 
• 
• • • • 

to 

important  exception 

the electoral law of that Member State with 
regard to its own nationals. This includes·for 
instance,  access 
the  same  appeal 
to 
procedures  with  regard  to  omissions  or 
errors  in  the  electoral  roll  or  in  the 
application  to  stand,  maintenance  on  the 
electoral roll  under the same conditions  a~ 
nationals, etc. 
An 
this  rule 
concerns the first  entry on to  the  electoral 
roll in the Member State of residence. In the 
case  of  European  Parliament  elections  it 
must be requested by the citizen in order to 
safeguard his/her freedom of choice. In the 
case  of municipal elections,  Member States 
which  do  not  have  compulsory  voting  are 
free  to choose  between  an automatic  entry 
on the roll or one on request. Most Member 
States  make  use  of an automatic entry into 
the electoral roll as  this  appears more cost 
a  wider 
allows 
effective 
participation. 

and 

for 

•  Extra-territorial  effect  of 

the 

rules  on 
disqualification  of  candidates  - The  idea 
behind  this  principle  is  to  prevent  citizens 
regaining their civic rights simply by moving 
from  one Member State  to  another.  In the 
case  of  European  Parliament  elections 
persons  deprived  of  the  right  to  stand  as 
candidates  in  their  own  Member  State  are 
~trictly  forbidden  from  being  elected  in 
another  Member  Stc.te.  In  the  case  of 
!Tlunicipa! elections,  M~ember States are free 
to  choose  whether  on  not  to  preclude 
citizens who  have  lost their right to stand in 
their  Member  State  of  residence  from 
running for office. 

BB 

to  be 

exceptionally 

•  Derogations  only  if  warranted  by  a  specific 
situation  in  a  Member  State  - Minimum 
residence  requirements  for  foreign  Union 
citizens only are,  in principle,  incompatible 
with  the  non-discrimination  rule.  However 
permits 
Article 
derogations  from  the  principle  of  equai 
treatment 
introduced  where 
warranted  by  the  specific  situation  in  a 
Member  State.  Both  Directives  recognize 
that  Member  States  whose  proportion  of 
non-national Union citizens exceeds 20% of 
eligible voters may be granted a derogation. 
the  case  of  European  Parliament 
In 
elections,  the  minimum  residence  period 
that  may  be  requested  before  granting 
electoral  rights  may  not  exceed  5  and  1 0 
years  for  voters  and candidates respectively. 
Luxembourg  is  the  only  Member  State  to 
apply such a derogation. 
In  the  case  of  municipal  elections,  the 
minimum  residence  period  must  not 
exceed  the  term  for  which  the  municipal 

in 

authority  is  elected  in  the  case  of  voters, 
the  case  of 
this 
and,  · or  double 
candidates.  Two  Member  States  benefit 
from  such  a  derogation,  Luxembourg  and 
Belgium.  The  latter  however  !r.ay  only 
impose  minimum  residence  periods  for 
voters in a limited number of mcnidpaHties 
and is  required to signal  its  intention to do 
so one year before the ballot takes place. 

•  An adequate  info .. 71Jation  campaign  - Member 
States  have  the obligation to  inform Union 
citizens  resident  in  their  te:-ritory  in  good 
time and in an appropriate marmer of their 
new  electoral  rights.  This  a  particularly 
important  aspect  of  the  new  entitlements 
which  cannot  be  fully  exercised  in  the 
absence of proper information. 

This  being  said,  there  are  provisions  that 
specifically  address  issues  recurrer..t  only  in 
European  Parliament  or 
in  municipal 
elections.  Thus the two  Directives  differ as  far 
as the following provisions are concerned. 

•  A  single  vote  and a  single  candidature  for  the 
European  Parliament elections - In conformity 
with the  1976 Act on the election of MEPs5
, 
no one may vote  or stand as  a  candidate in 
more  than  one 1'.1ember  State  in  the  same 
election.  In  order  to  avoid  dcuble  voUng 
and  double  candidature,  !•vfember  States · 
exchange  information  on  their  nat!onals 
exercising their rights abroad. 

•  Certain  posts  reserved  to  nationals  only  in 
municipal elections - The  directive  allows  for 
Member States to reserve the posts of mayor 
and deputy mayor to their own nationals. In 
most  Member  States,  the  mayor  and  to  a 
large extent also the aldermen exercise state 
devolved  functions  such  as,  for  instance, 
overseeing  the  local  police  forces.  This 
derogation 
the  principle  of  non 
discrimination  is  therefore  in  conformity 
with the provisions of Articles 48  ( 4)  and 55 
according  to  which  the  exercise  of  state 
devolved  functions  may  be  reserved  for 
nationals.  Its implementation however must 
be carried out in the respect of the principle 
of  proportionality  and  it  may  not  restrict 
more than necessary the possibility for other 
Member States'  nationals to be elected. 

to 

5  Act  concerning  the  election  of  the  representatives  of  the 
European  Parliament  by  direct  universal  suffrage  annexed  to 
Council  Decision  76/787/EC  of  20.9.1976  In  OJ  L278  of 
8.10.1976 modified by Council Decision 1 February 1993in 0] L 
33/15 of 9.2.1993 

.•  '*  •· 
8 

* 
• 
• 
*  •·  • 

.. 
•  ~ -- -------~----·--- -· 
• 

1.2  The  citizens' reaction  in  the 
last European Parliament 
elections. 

A low participation rate 

Before  the  introduction  of Article  8B (2),  five 
Member States  had already extended electoral 
rights  to  nationals  from  other  Member  States 
resident  in  their  territory,  subject  to  certain 
conditions6
•  Today all Union citizens resident in 
a Member State of which they are not nationals 
have had the opportunity to vote in elections to 
the European Parliament. Directive 93/109 was 
applied  to  the June  1994  elections  and  to  the 
first  elections  held  in  the  three  new  Member 
States in September 1995 and in October 1996. 

the 

that 

adoption 

The reasons for this relatively low  participation 
are  many  and  may  partly. be  explained  by  the 
novelty  of  the  rights.  It  should  also  be 
considered 
and 
implementation  of  the  new  rules  allowed  for 
very  little  time  to  fully  inform both the citizen 
and 
the  competent  national  authorities. 
Adopted  in  December  1993,  Directive  93/109 
required  Member  States  to  introduce  the 
necessary  laws  for  its  implementation  by  1st 
February  1994  and was  first applied barely four 
months  after,  in  the  June  EP  elections.  Strict 
delays  for  registration coupled with  insufficient 
information  seem  to  have  excluded  a  number 
of potential voters. 

Expatriates  may  exercise  these  rights  either  by 
correspondence  or  proxy,  or  in  a  consulate. 
Given  the  fact  that  members  of the  European 
Parliament  are  elected  on  national  lists, 
numerous  citizens  preferred  to  vote  for  a 
candidate  of their  country  of origin  to  whom 
they  could  relate  in  a  well  known  political 
context". 

The Commission is in the process of submitting 
an evaluation  report on  the  application of the 
directive  to  the  last  EP  elections  which  also 
includes data on the  elections held in Sweden 
in September  1995  and in  Finland and Austria 
in  October  1996.  A  detailed  analysis  of the 
issues mentioned above may  be found therein. 

1.3  The  application of Directive 
94/80/EC  to  municipal 
elections held in  1996 

Implementation  Jaws  not  yet  adopted  by  a/1  the 
Member States 

Prior  to  the  adoption  of  Directive  94/80  in 
December  1994, 
local  voting  rights  were 
extended  to  residents  from  other  ·Member 
States  in  Ireland,  Denmark,  the  Netherlands, 
the  United 
Spain,  Sweden,  Finland  and 
Kingdom.  With  the exception of Ireland,  these 
rights were subject to certain conditions such as 
residence periods or reciprocity agreements. 

The Directive aJlowed  Member States a  period 
of two years to adapt their internal legislation to 
give  Union  citizens  the  right  to  participate  in 
local elections.  Throughout this time there has 
been great  attention  on  the  part of individual 
meps  and  citizens  at  large  to  the  introduction 
of  this  new  right  and  the  deadline  of  1st 
January  1996  was  closely  monitored  through 
information,  petitions  and 
for 
requests 
parliamentary questiqns 11

'. 

r: 
..... 
Q 
c 
:J .., 

.t.: 
ltrl 

QJ 
,N 

·~ l1f . ,.,. 

Apart  from  these  teething  problems,  a  more 
fundamental  point  must  be  considered. 
Elections  to  the  European  Parliament  are 
elections  to  a  single  institution  and  hence  the 
principle  of  "one  man-one  vote"  applies.  A 
Union  citizen  who  decides  to  vote  in  his 
Member State of residence  must renounce the 
possibility to vote in his Member State of origin. 
The need to make this choice was  a  realit~ for 
most  expatriate  Union citizens  because all  the 
Member  States  with  the  exception  of Ireland 
grant  voting  rights  in  European  Parliament 
elections  to  their  nationals  living  abroad. 

•  Ireland.  Belgium,  the  Netherlands,  the  United  Kingdom  (Irish 

citizens only)  and Italy  (candidates only). 

7  Ms  Wlhnya  Zimmermann, a Dutch citizen,  resident In  Germany. 
•  Eurobarometer surveys  n•4t, July  1994. 
•  A spontaneous enquiry of officials of the European Institutions to 
which  roughly  2'){,  of  the  staff  replied  revealed  that  the  most 
important reason  preventing them  from  voting in their Member 
State  of residence  was  the  fact  that  the  election  campaign  was 
focused  exclusively  on 
Issues.  Cf  also 
Eurobarometer survey  n•4J  on  the  possible  factors  Influencing 
the vote. 

internal  policy 

w  Over  19 parliamentary questions and 8 petitions In the reference 

period. 

• 

• • • 
9 

.  ... 

•  *  • 

• 

The  first  time  Union  citizens  took  part  in 
municipal  elections  on  the  basis  of  the 
Directive  was  in Berlin  in  October  1995.  Since 
then,  the  Directive  has  been  applied 
in 
elections  and  by-elections  in  Luxembourg, 
Italy,  in  various  German  and  Austrian  Uinder, 
in Finland and in the United Kingdom. 

Electoral  data  on  the  level  of participation  of 
Union citizens is at present not complete as it is 
not  systematically  compiled  for  non-nationals. 
The only indicative turnout figures for the non 
national  electorate concern the  German  Land 
of Bavaria and the Austrian Land of Vienna.  In 
Bavaria,  taken  as  a  whole,  non-national  voter 
turnout  varied  between  21%-25%.  In  Vienna 
the percentage of EU voters was 35,5%. In both 
cases,  the  participation  of  non-nationals  was 
below the average of that of national voters. 

The Commission is  required to submit a report 
on the application of the directive within a year 
of  the  holding  of  scheduled  municipal 
elections  in  all  the  Member  States,  that  is  by 
2001.  It  will  also  have  to  present,  by  31 
December  1998,  a  report 
the 
justification 
residence 
requirements  for  non-national  Union  citizens 
in Luxembourg and Belgium is  examined. 

for  mmtmum 

in  which 

1.4  Improving  the  citizens' 

participation 

Increasing the information available and promoting 
access to candidatures 

~n,:···· 
.the 
partt~ipatfon  of  Union.  c~tl%,~5.  Fi  :' .. ,. and 
forernostthete was  ~la,cko~,itlfomtati~l'l·flbQ~~ 
.  ~>~ra  ·  ally 
.~!;:Jhe ..  · ·. 
n~·· 
· 
··1:can 
lo 

( · 

The  first  problem  is  relatively  easy  to  tackle. 
Vast  information  campaigns  such  as  "Citizens 
First!"  coupled  with  the  efforts  on  the  part  of 
Member  States  and  a  greater  familiarity  with 
time, 
the  new  rights  should  provide. 
sufficient  information  to  citizens.  Member 
States should of course be the front-runners in 
providing  information  as  this  is  an  obligation 
they have to comply with on the basis of Article 
12  of  Directive  109/93  and  article  11  of 
Directive 94/80. 

in 

The  second  problem  is  morP  complex  and 
requires  careful  consideration.  The  presPnt 

.. 

10 

"' 

prov1s10ns  of  the  Treaty  P1ereiy  grant  voting 
rights without mentioning other poH~Jcal rights 
such as  the right of association ar:d freeC:.om  o~ 
expression.  Yet  the  iatter  are  ~DtrinsicaHy pre 
conditions  for  the  meaningfu!  exercise  of the 
former. 

International  law  itself  and  the  European 
Convention  on  the  Protection  of  Human 
Rights  and  Fundamental Freedoms  (ECI1R)  in 
particular,  to  which  Article  ~·  of  the  Treaty 
refers,  considers  the  politica!  status  of  non 
nationals  as  a  matter  doseiy  connected  with 
national sovereignty. Articles  10  (2) , ! 1 ( 1)  and 
14  of  the  Convention  grant  the  freedom  of 
expression,  of  peaceful  assembly  and  of 
association 
irrespective  of 
nationality.  Yet 
its  Article  16  allows  thr 
contracting  parties  to  impose  restrictions  on 
the political  activities  of aliens' 2
•  The accession 
of to the European Community to the ECHR is 
at present being discussed  in the framework of 
the Intergovernmentc:I Conference. 

to  everybody, 

Some Member States have corresponding rules 
in  their  legislaHon.  These  rules  subject  the 
political  activity  of non-nationals  to  a  number 
of  conditions,  such  as  the  prohibition  of 
becoming  a  member  of  a  political  party  for 
example  or  a  general  obligation  of  political 
neutrality as  far  as  policy questions in  the  host 
Member State are concerned . 

The  link  between  voting  rights  and  the 
participation  in  the  political  debate  is  all  the 
more clear if we consider that in some Member 
States  only  political  parties  are  entitled  to 
present  candidates  for  European  Parliament 
and local  elections. 

"  Cf the  forthcoming  Commission  Report  on  the  Monitoring  of 
Community  law  in  1996  - COM  {97)  600.  The Commission  has 
decided to issue reasoned opinions in the case of France, Greect•, 
Belgium,  Spain,  Sweden,  Austria  (partial  implementation)  and 
Finland  (partial  implementation).  It  should  be  noted  that  in 
Sweden  although  the  Directive  has  not  been  Implemented. 
foreign  residents  have  been able to vote since the 70s,  subject  to 
a  period of residence in  the country. 

'

1  1\  recent judgement the European Court of Human  Hlghts  (Case 
5/1994/452/53 i, Piermont vs  France.)  seems to suggest that tht· 
notion of alien  In  Article  16  of the echr should not be applied to 
nationals of the EU  Member States.  But In  the absence of furth(•r 
clarification  of  this  Interpretation.  the  reference  In  /\rtlclc  I" 
cannot  be  said  to  guarantee  automatically  the  enjoyment  or 
political  rights  by  Union  dtlzens  residing  in  a  Member State  of 
which  they  are  not  nationals.  Nor can  one draw  ou the  case  law 
of  the  European  Court  of  justice  concerning  constitutional 
trad!llon~ rommonto tlw  Member States as gerwr<1l  ptlnciples of 
law 

rights conferred by  the Treaty.  But the benefits 
that may ensue from  its appHcation.  ~n terms of 
a greater integration of Union citizens  in  their 
host  Member  State  are  most  likely  to  be  felt 
on~inthelong~rm. 

Voting  rights  for  non-nationals  Union  citizens 
are  indeed  the  most  important  of  the  new 

11  cfr  also  Resolution  of  the  European  Parliament  on  the 
constitutional  status  of  European  political  parties  adopted  on 
10.12.1!J96 - Doe  PE  254.448 

2. Consular and  diplomatic protection  in  the making 

The  legislative framework  established 

Article 8C establishes the right to protection by 
the  diplomatic  or  consular  authorities  of any 
Member  State  in  third  countries  where  the 
citizen's  Member  State  is  not  represented,  on 
the same conditions as nationals of that State. It 
also  indicates  that the  implementing rules  are 
to  be  adopted  by  the  Member  States.  This 
provision is  echoed in Article ].6. 

The potential practical impact of this rule is not 
negligible.  At  present,  there  are  only five  non 
EU  countries  where  all  Member  States  are 
•  On  the  other  hand  there  are 
represented' 4
seventeen  countries  where  only  two  Member 
States are represented. 

In  May  1993  a  first  set  of guidelines  for  the 
protection of unrepresented Union citizens by 
Member States'  missions in third countries was 
adopted,  and  came  into  force  four  months 
later.  Work  on  the  legislative  framework  has 
since continued and an important step forward 
was 
taken  on  19  December  1995.  The 
Representatives  of  the  Governments  of  the 
Member  States  meeting  within  the  Council 
adopted  two  Decisions,  the  first  regarding 
protection  for  citizens  of  the  Union  by 
diplomatic  and  consular  representations' 5  and 
the  second  on  the  implementing  measures  to 
be adopted by consular officials 16

• 

Governments  of  the  Member  States  meeting 
within  the  Council,  Jay  down  the rules  for  the 
delivrance  of an  emergency travel  document' 7 
(ETD). The ETD  may be issued, for one return 
journey. to EU nationals who find themselves in 
distress  whilst  in  a  third  country  because,  for 
example, their travel documents have been lost 
or  stolen.  As  with  the  1995  Decisions.  these 
provisions  will  take  effect  only  when  all  the 
Member  States  have  adopted  the  necessary 
procedures for their application. 

To  make  these  arrangements  known  to  the 
public  in  general.  the Member States  and  the 
Commission  agreed  on  the  text  of a  common 
leaflet  "Consular protection for  citizens  of the 
European  Union"' 8
•  It  spells  out  clearly  the 
practical steps to be taken by citizens in distress 
and the type  of assistance that can be expected 
from  Embassies  and  Consulates  of  other 
Member  States.  On  top  of the  distribution  of 
this leaflet that each Member State may decide 
for its own nationals, the leaflet will  be available 
in  Commission's  representations  in  third 
countries and  will  be  inserted  in  the  "Citizens 
First"  information initiative. 

Given that these  rules are not yet implemented 
an evaluation at this stage is  not possible. 

t 

1

"  Russian  Federation, japan, USA,  China and Switserland 
"  Decision 95/553/EC In  Oj L 314/73 of28.12.1995 
"  Not published in  the Official Journal 
"  Decision !l6/40!J/CFSP In  Oj  I.  HiH/4  of6.7.1!l!l6 
'"  Doe SN  :~230/!Jfi of 17 June  199(i 

CIJ 
.r.: 
't  , 

Q. 
.i,.. 

.r.: i"' c: .., 
..... 
.... 

N 

•  ul 

'-J 

, . , 

11 

•  •  * 

• 
... 
• 

• 
• 
• 

3~ Non-judicial means  of protecting  the  rights  of citizens 

of the Union 

there  has  been, 

procedure  refer  to  the  Union's  sphere  of 
activity.  As  this includes second and third pillar 
issues  (common foreign and security policy and 
co-operation  in  the fields  of Justice and  Home 
affairs) 
in  practice.  an 
enlargement  of  the  scope.  At  present  tlw 
Committee  of  Petitions  of  the  European 
Parliament  considers  petitions  admissible  if 
they  relate to  the contents of the Treaties or to 
secondary  legislation,  if  they  refer  to  matters 
relevant  to  foreseeable  developments  in  the 
Community or if they  relate  to  the activities  of 
institution  or  Community  body.  The 
an 
Commission has, for its part followed  this broad 
interpretation of the rules by  the Committee of 
Petitions. 

3. 1. 1  The  experience  in  the  last  three 

parliamentary  years 

A steady flow of petitions 

Petitions are an important link between citizens 
and  the  institutions.  They  provide  the  latter 
with  a  picture  of  the  concerns  and  needs  of 
individual  citizens,  highlight  shortcomings  in -
Community  legislation  or  in  administrative 
action  and  reflect  current  public  opinion.  To 
the citizens themselves they are a wide means of 
recourse,  subject  to  less  strict  admissibility 
criteria than the complaints to the Commission 
or/and the Ombudsman. 

In  establishing a  citizenship  of the  Union.  the 
Treaty  also  provided  non-judicial  mechanisms 
for  the protection of citizens.  These means  of 
recourse,  free  of  charge,  are  the  rights  to 
petition  the  European  Parliament  and  to 
address 
the  European 
Ombudsman. 

complaints 

to 

of 

their 

perception 

Although  the  EP  and  the  Ombudsman  are 
empowered  with  quite  distinct  tasks. 
the 
citizens' 
specific 
competence is  not as yet firmly established as  is 
shown  by  the number of inadmissible petitions 
and complaints. Consequently there have  been 
extensive  efforts  to  establish  coordinating 
procedures between  these  two  bodies  in  order 
to ensure that a citizen's grievances can actually 
be  dealt  with.  Therefore,  the  Committee  on 
Petitions and the Ombudsman now  exchange, 
complaints  and  petitions.  where  appropriate 
and with the authors' consent. 

3. 1  The  right  to petition  the 
European parliament 

A wide ranging access 

Article 8D gives every Union citizen the right to 
petition the European Parliament. 

included  provisions 

This  however  is  not entirely a  new  entitlement 
as  it  already  existed  in  the  internal  rules  of 
procedure of the European Parliament. In fact. 
in  can  be  traced  back  as  far  as  1953  when  the 
ECSC  Assembly 
for 
petitions in its internal rules. Article 8D's added 
value  is  to  have  upgraded  an  institutional 
practice  into  a  right  with  a  specific  legal  basis 
which  entitles  the  European  Parliament  to 
request  co-operation  and  information  both 
from  the  European  institutions  and  national 
authorities. 

borders. 
. .  and 

raised.•. 

Most of these petitions are forwarded by  the EP 
the 
the  Commission  which  provides 
to 

Article  138D  of  the  Treaty  indicates  that 
petitions must fall within the Community's field 
of  activity  whereas  the  Parliament's  rules  or 

'"  Cl'r  aunllal  n·ports  of  the  Committee  011  pP! it ions  (Does  I' I·. 

~ i IUI!Jii,  PI·:  ~ 1'/ .li I;,;  I'E  212.;,()0,  I'E  20H.02!l). 

..  *  jlo 
• 
• 
,. 
•  12 
• 
• 
• *  • 

information  required  or,  if appropriate,  opens 
infringement  procedures  against  the  Member 
State  concerned  for  violation  of  Community 
law.  During  the  period  covered  by  this  report 
14  cases  of  su:!pected  infringenwnts 
detected  as  a  dIre et  result  of a  petition  to  the 
European ParHmnr·nt 2r:. 

may  be  submitted,  the  procedure  to  be 
foUowe,d  in  the inquiries and  the details of co 
operation with  the other institutions. 

Although  a  satisfactory  outcome  cannot  be 
achieved  for  all  petitions,  due  to  the  limited 
powers  of  the  institutions  involved,  in  some 
individual  cases  the EP  and the  Commission's 
intervention  has  led  to  national  laws  being 
amended,  international  agreements  being 
signed 
and 
administrative  authorities  reviewing  illegal 
practices21
•  In  order  to  improve  the  way  In 
which  petitions  are  processed  there  is  a 
constant  and  fruitful  dialogue  between  the 
Commission and the Committee of Petitions. 

enterprises 

private 

and 

.,.. 
c: 
~ 

3.2  The  right  to apply to the 

Ombudsman 

The European  Unions first Ombudsman 

Article BD  (2)  stipulates that every citizen of the 
Union  may  apply  to  the  Ombudsman.  The 
framework for his action is laid down in Article 
138e  which  further  extends  this  right  to  all 
natural or legal persons residing or having their 
registered office in a Member State. As with the 
right  of  petition,  the  right  to  address  the 
Ombudsman  is  available  to  all  legal  residents 
whether or not they are citizens of the Union. 

The  task  of the  Ombudsman  is  to  investigate 
cases  of  alleged  maladministration  in  the 
activities  of  the  Community  institutions  and 
bodies,  with  the  exception  of  the  Court  of 
Justice and the Court of First instance acting in 
their  judicial  capacity.  Acts  of  national 
authorities22  or  of  international  organisations 
are excluded  from  the Ombudsman's scope. 

The  Ombudsman  conducts  enquiries,  totally 
independently.  either on  his  own  initiative  or 
following  a  complaint.  He  cannot  however 
order an  administrative  authority  to  change  a 
decision or grant redress, by awarding damages 
or annulling administrative decisions. This role 
is  reserved  for  the Court of First  Instance and 
the  European  Court of Justice  acting  in  their 
judicial capacity. 

Detailed  rules  on  the  regulations  and general 
conditions  governing  the  performance  of the 
Ombudsman's  duties  were  adopted  by  the 
European Parliament on 9 March 199423
•  These 
rules, known as the Statute of the Ombudsman, 
set out the conditions under which a complaint 

Since taking up office to the end of December 
1996,  the  Ombudsman  has  received  1.140 
complaints.  Of aiJ  the complaints received  the 
examination  of  admissibility  has  been 
completed  in  921  cases.  Only  34%  of these 
complaints  turned  out  to  be  within  the 
mandate  of  the  Ombudsman.  The  main 
the 
institutions  subject 
to 
European  Commission 
the 
European Parliament  (19 cases)  the Council of 
the European Union  (4  cases)  and the Court of 
Auditors  (5  cases).  Out of the 210 cases where 
inquiry has been started,  l 02 were closed by the 
end of December  1996.  No  maladmlnlstration 
was  found  in 82 cases27

inquiries  are 
( 187  cases). 

• 

:~~•  Cf.  Commission's  12th  (1994).  13th "(1995)  ~:~nnual  reports  on 
monitoring the application of Community law,  respectively 0) C 
254/ I  of  29.10.1994,  OJ  C  303/ I  of  14.10.1996.  Cf.  also  the 
forthcoming  14th Report for  1996 · clt 

2

'  Examples of specific cases may  be found  In the annual reports of 

the Committee of Petitions. 

22  This  exclusion  Is  applicable  even  if  the  national  authority  In 
question  Is  responsible  for  the  Implementation  of Community 
law or policies. 

2'  European  Parliament  Decision  94/262/ECS/EC/Euratom  of 9 
March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing 
the performance of the Ombudsman's duties In  Oj L 113/15 of 
4.5.1994. This decision was adopted after the Commission issued 
Its opinion and the Council gave Its approval. 

2
' 

In  OJ L 225/17 of 22.9.1~96 

"'  In  Oj C 234/1  of 12 August  1996.  Cfr also the EP  reaction to the 

report, Doe  PE  217.098 

2

"  Doe ME 0006  not yet published 

;,  SEC  (97)  731  of 20  February 1997. 

• • * 
• .. 
13 
• • •  '* 

• 
* 
• 
•  .. 

ln:;.ll u1 \c,:;s  and  the  c!tizen.s  'c~annm  yet  bt' 
made.  Nevertheless,  it should  be  kept  in  mind 
that the function of the Ombudsman is to make 
the  institutions more open and  democratically 
accountable,  and  his  action  is  inevitably  an 
incentive  for  the institutions under scrutiny to 
remedy inappropriate administrative practices. 

In  1996,  the  Ombudsman  initiated  three 
investigations on his own initiative, all of which 
relate  to  information  and  transparency.  The 
first concerns the rules of access to documents 
followed by Community institutions other than 
the Commission and Council, where a code of 
conduct  is  already  in  place28
•  The  second 
focuses  on  information  in  the  recruitment 
procedure  and  the  third  one  deals  with  the 
information given  to citizens who  complain to 
the  Commission  alleging  a  breach  of 
Community law. 

•  Code  of  conduct  concerning  pubbc  assess 

to  Council  and 
Commission  documents  (93/730/EC)  In  OJ  L  340/41  of 
31.12.1993 

11.  THE  RIGHTS  CONFERRED  PRIOR  TO  THE  TREATY  ON  EUROPEAN 

UNION 

4. Right  to  free movement 

The free  movement of persons comprises  two 
concepts,  each of which  falls  within  the scope 
of  a  different  line  of  reasoning  under  the 
Treaty.  Article Sa, which is found in Part '1\vo of 
the Treaty, entitled "Citizenship of the Union", 
confers on every citizen of the Union the right 
to move and reside freely within the territory of 
the  Member  States,  subject 
certain 
conditions.  Article  7a,  on  the  other  hand, 
found  • in  Part  One,  entitled 
which 
"Principles",  falls  within  the  scope  of  the 
establishment  of  the  internal  market  and 
provides for free movement without controls at 
internal  Community 
This 
elimination  of controls  applies  to  all  persons, 
irrespective of their nationality, since Article 7 a 
would  otherwise  be  deprived  of any  practical 
effectiveness. 29 

frontiers. 

to 

is 

For reasons of clarity,  the evolution in the last 
three years of the rights enshrined in Article Sa 
and Article 7 a will  be treated separately below. 

. 
..... 
.. 
* ------- 
• 
•  • 
• 
*  * • 

14 

4. 1 Article Ba  of the EC  Treaty: 

right of entry and residence  of 
citizens of the Union 

Complex legislation 

The concept of free  movement was  reinforced 
by  the Treaty  on European  Union:  as  a  right 
conferred  on  every  citizen  of the  Union,  it  is 
now  regarded  as  a  fundamental  and  personal. 
right,  within  the European Community,  which 
may  be  exercised  outside  the  context  of  an 
economic activity. 

, 

In its White Paper on European Social Policy30
the  Commission  also  indicated,  with  a  view  to 
the  establishment  of citizenship  of the  Union 
and the internal market, the need to review the 
conditions  laid  down  in  secondary  legislation 
for  the  exercise  of  the  free  movement  of 
persons. 

a  Commission Communication of 8 May  1992, SEC (92)  877 ftnal 

•  COM  (94)333, 27.7.1994 

Article  Sa  does  not,  however,  constitute  a 
comprehensive legal base from which all  rights 
relating to the free movement of citizens of the 
Union derive.  It cannot take the place of other 
existing  legal  bases  dealing  with  specific 
categories  of  persons,  in  respect  of  which 
secondary legislation lays down distinctions and 
limitations. 

1.  Reguiatior.  (EEC)  No  1612/68  of  the 
Council  of 15  October  1968  on freedom  of 
moverileni: 
the 
Community; 31 

for  workers  within 

2.  Council  Directive  68/360/EEC  of  15 
the  abo!ition  of 
October  1968  on 
restrictions  on  moveme~'1t and 
residence 
within  the  Community  for  workers  of 
Member States and their families; 32 

3.  Councii  :Oirective  73/ 148/EEC  of  21  May 
1973  a::  the  :1bolition  of  restrictions  on 
movement  and 
the 
Community for  nationals of Member States 
with  regard  to  establishment  and  the 
p:-ovislon  of services; 33 

residence  within 

4.  Regulatior..  (EEC)  No  1251/70  of  the 
Commission of 29 June 1970 on the right of 
workers  to  remain  in  the  territory  of  a 
Member State  after  having  been  employed 
in that State;34 

5.  Council  Directive  75/34/EEC  of  17 
December  197 4  concerning  the  right  of 
nationals  of a  Member  State  to  remain  in 
the territory of another Member State after 
having  pursued  therein an activity  in  a self 
employed capacity; 35 

6.  Council  Directive  90/364/EEC  of 28  June 

1990 on the right of residence;  36 

7.  Council  Directive  90/365/EEC  of 28  June 
1990  on 
the  right  of  residence  for 
employees  and self-employed  persons who 
have ceased their occupaUonal activity;  37 
8.  Council  Directive  93/96/EEC  of  29 
October  1993  on the  right of residence for 
students;38 

9.  Council  Directive  64/221 /EEC  of  25 
February  1964  on  the  co-ordination  of 
special measures concerning the movement 
and  residence  of  foreign  nationals  which 
are  justified  on  grounds  of  public  policy, 
public security or  pubJic health; 39 

10. Council  Directive  7 2 I 194 I EEC  of  18  May 
1972  extending  to  workers  exercising  the 
right to remain in the territory of a Member 
State  after  having  been  employed  in  that 
State the scope of Directive 64/221/EEC; 40 
11. Council  Directive  75/35/EEC  of  17 
December  197 4  extending  the  scope  of 
Directive  64/221 /EEC  to  include  nationals 
of a Member State who exercise the right to 
remain  in  the  territory  of another Member 
State  after  having  pursued  therein  an 
activity in a self-employed capacitt'. 

4.2  Experience  of the past  three 

years 

Mixed results 

Implementation  of  the  rights  laid  down  by 
Community  law  in  connection  with  the  free 
movement  of persons  has  led  the  Commission 
to the following findings: 

• 

transposal  in  the  Member  States  of  the 
Council Directives, particularly those on the 
right  of  residence  of  retired  persons, 
students  and  persons  having  ceased  work 
has  not  always  been  carried  out  satisfactorily, 
which  has  led  the  Commission  to  initiate  a 
number of infringement procedures.  Of the  ten 
procedures  orjginally 
(new 
Member  States  exciuded)  for  failing  to 
transpose  these  three  Directives  properly, 
seven  are  still  under  way,  while 
the 
procedure  for  failing  to  trans1:mse  the  two 
Directives  on  retired  persons  and  persons 

initiated 

"  OJ L 257/475,  19.10.1968, English Special Edition: Series-! 68(II} 

"  OJ L 257/485,  19.10.1968, English Special Edition: Series·! 68(II) 

''  0] L 172/14, 28.6.1973 

"  Oj L 142/24, 30.6.1970 

"  0] L  14/10,20.1.1975 

:111  Oj L  180/26. 13.07.1990 

37  Oj L 1 80/28,  13.07.1990 

""  OJ  L 317/59,  18.12.1993 

'"'  01 L 56/117, 4.4.1964, English Special Edition: Series· I  (63·64). 

"'  0] L 121/32, 26.5.1972 

"  OJ  L 14/14, 20.1.1975 

,.,.. 
:N 
...., 
,. filii/Ill 
t....l 

• 

..  *  • 

• 

and propose solutions.  The Panel's Report, 
which was  presented to the Commission on 
18  March,  covered  these situations at  some 
length  and  will  have  to  be  the subject  of a 
detailed examination by the Institutions. 

4.3  Failure  to  revise provisions on 

right of residence 

Several legal bases 

the 

Since 
[ast  Commission  Report  on 
Citizenship,  no  new  legal  provisions  aimed  at 
facilitating  or  simplifying  the  right  to  reside 
freely within the territory of the Member States 
has been adopted. 

having  ceased  work  resulted  in  Germany 
being  censured  by  the  Court  of Justice 42
• 
Where  employed  persons  are  concerned, 
the Court of justice censured Belgium in its 
judgment  of  20  February  1997  (Case  C-
344/95)  for  infringing  the  provisions  on 
residence arrangements and formalities. 

or 

particularly 

•  application of the  rights which  citizens can 
claim  under  Community  law  comes  up 
against  problems  concerning  mainly 
incorrect 
restrictive 
administrative  practices.  Reference  may  be 
made  in  this  respect  to  the  practice  of 
requesting a whole series of documents not 
law  as  a 
required  under  Community 
condition for the issue of a residence permit 
or visa to a member of the family of a citizen 
of the Union. 43 

is  ill-adapted 

Community  Jaw 
to  certain 
particular  situations.  The  Green  Paper  on 
"Education  - Training  - Research:  The 
obstacles  to  transnational  mobility"  iisted 
some examples, such as  that of trainees and 
voluntary workers. 44 

the right of residence in the Union is often wrongly 
perceived  by  citizens  as  an  unconditional  right 
applicable to all, even nationals in their own 
Member  State.  This  is  particularly  true  in 
the  case  of a  national  in  his  own  Member 
State whose family members are nationals of 
a third country.  This situation is in principle 
not  covered  by  secondary  legislation 45 
whereas such a right is enjoyed by citizens of 
the  Union  who  are  not  nationals  of  the 
Member State concerned.  As  a result of the 
indivisible  nature  of  citizenship  of  the 
Union,  such  a  distinction  is  regarded  with 
disfavour,  particularly  where  national 
provisions  on  family  reunification  are 
stricter 
from 
those 
Community  law.  Certain  Member  States, 
however,  apply  the  same  principles  of 
of 
in 
Community 
circumstances. 

deriving 

both 

than 

sets 

law 

, 

• 

the  remaining  shortcomings  and  obstacles 
to  full  exercise  of  the  free  movement  of 
persons  require  legislative  initiatives  to  be 
•  These obstacles stem mainly from 
taken46 
the changes in the scope of free  movement 
within  the Union,  consisting in a  shift away 
from  the freedom  of movement  of workers 
towards a  freedom  of movement of persons 
that  more  closely  resembles  the  situation 
within  a  single  Member  State.  On  24 
January  1996,  the  Commission,  aware  as  it 
was  of these  difficulties,  appointed  a  High 
Level Panel on  the  Free  Movement  of Persons  to 
examine  problems in  this  area,  assess  them 

.. 

*  ... 
• 
• 
16 
•  - - - - - - - -
• 
• 
* • • 

The  need  to  revise  those  legal  instruments, 
which  has  already  been  identified  by  the 
Commission 47
,  was  confirmed  by  the  Brussels 
European  Council 
However,  this  objective  could  not  be  achieved 
by  the Commission on account of the legal and 
institutional  problems  associated  with  such  a 
revision 49

in  December  1993 4

R. 

• 

The  drawing  up  of  a  single  instrument 
grouping together in a coherent manner all the 
secondary  legislation  applicable  to  citizens  of 
the  Union  and  their  families  comes  up  major 
legal obstacles in the existing context of the EC 
Treaty.  The  obstacles  stem  from  the  diverse 

"  12th,  13th  and  14th  annual  reports  by  the  Commission  on 
monitoring  the application  of Community  law,  supra;  Court of 
justice  judgment  of  20  March  1997,  Case  C-96/97,  not  yet 
published. 

"  1994  Commission  Report  "The  Community  Single  Market". 
Office  for  Official  Publications  of the  European  Communities. 
Luxembourg,  page 50. 

"  COM (96)  462  final. 

"  judgement 7 July  1992,  case C370/90,  ECR.  1992,  1-4265. 

••  In  1989,  the  Commission  presented  proposals aimed,  inter alia. 
at  Improving  residence  conditions  for  employees:  0] C  100/(i, 
21.4.1989; 0] c 119,  15.5.1990. 

47  Commission  report  to  the European  Council  on the adaptation 
of Comnnmlty legislation to  the subsidiarity principle: COM (93) 
545  final.  24.11.1993. 

••  Conclusions of the European Council: Bulletin EC  12  1993. point 

1.14. 

••  Report  011  the  functioning  of the  Treaty  on  European  Union. 

SEC (95)  731,  pp. 8 and 33. 

nature  of  the  legal  bases  of  the  existing 
instruments,  for  which  Article  Sa  of  the  EC 
Treaty  cannot  be  substituted  as  a  single, 
comprehensive  legal  basis.  Differences  also 
exist in the procedures for adopting these texts. 

combined should generate entry and residence 
rights in the Member States of the Union, as is 
the case with  political rights.  However, Article 
8a  is  merely  a  supplementary  base  which 
cannot replace other more specific bases,  most 
of which  relate  to  certain  categories,  such  as 
Articles 49,  54,  56 and 6 of the EC  Treaty. 

Directive 
i 64/221/EEC 

i  Council 
[ Directive 

68/360/EEC 

1 

r  Council 

I Regulat:on 
I  (EEC)  No 
J1612/6s 

Article  49 

codecJslon 

189b-
codecision 

Article  49 

!  189b-

I 

I 

! 

codeclsion 

1

1 

I 

c 
..... 
0 
c 
~ 

jj Article  49  &-

I C~unc~l 
1 Directive 
56 (2) 
I 72/194/EEC 
r--- --------------- ~--~--- __________ t __________ --------
1  189b -
Council 
Directive 
1  codecision 

i  189b-
. codecision 
i 

Article 54 (2) 

1  Article 63 (2) 

, 73/ 148/EEC 
1 

! Counc;J- --+ ~cl;235 . ... 

I 

Directive 
75/34/EEC 

r----------r-----------

Council 
Directive 
75/35/EEC 

Article 56 (2) 

Article  235 

Qual.  maj.  after 

::::::;after 

EP  opinion 

189b-
codecision 
Unanimity after 
EP  opinion 

~-
-
I  Unanimity after 

-

I Council 
Article 235 
1 D i r e c t iv e /  I EP opinion 
90/364/EEC 

t

I Article 235 
I 

90/365/EEC I 

[ Council 
Directive 
I 
~-Co~~~  Article  7 EEC  (6  t -1 : , ;  l;g~~-

/ Unanimity after 
, EP 
I 

[ Directive 
j  93/96/EEC 

~ommi~~~n 

Regulation 
(EEC) 

j  No  1251/70 

t 
1  Co~~~~~ion. 

/'  after consulting 

EC) 

: 

I Article -48(3) (d) 
i 
I 
1 

-----~ 

__ 

EP 

I 

4.4  Need for revision  of Article Ba 

A single legal instrument 

ln  citizenship  of 

With Articles 8 and Sa of the EC Treaty, the free 
movement  of  persons  becomes  the  main 
element 
the  Union, 
Conceptually, these Articles constitute both the 
point  of  convergence  between  a  number  of 
rights  (those  existing  prior  to  the  entry  into 
force  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union  and 
those referred therein which have subsequently 
been  created)  and  the  point of departure  for 
new  developments. 

Logically  speaking,  therefore,  these  articles 

4.5 Article 7 a  and the elimination 
of controls on persons at 
internal frontiers 

European  Union 

According  to  the  Single  European  Act,  the 
internal  market  was  to  be  completed  by  31 
December  1992  with  the  establishment  of an 
As  regards  the 
area  without  frontiers. 
elimination  of controls on  persons  at  internal 
frontiers, the debates held In all the Institutions 
of the  Union  indicate  that  views  differs  as  to 
both  the  objective  sought  and  the  means  of 
achieving it. 

Measures  aimed  at  achieving  a  high  level  of 
security  in  the  area  without  frontiers,  which 
condition  the  elimination  of  controls  on 
persons irrespective of nationality,  have not yet 
aH  been  adopted  or Implemented.  Moreover, 
some  of these  measures  are  based  on  the  EC 
treaty,  while others may  be applied only within 
the scope of Title VI of the Treaty on European 
Union. 

,.,  COM(95)  347,  OJ  C  289/16,  30.10.1995,  COM(95)  346,  OJ  C 
306/5, 17.11.1995, COM{95)348,  OJ C 307/ltl,  18.11.1995.  Two 
of these  ;Jroposals  have been amended  following  an opinion by 
the EP:  see  COM{97) 106  flnal  of 20.3.1997.  Flanking measures 
already approved and Implemented Include: Cour!cll  Regulat!o~ 
{EC)  No  2317/95 of 25  September  1995  determining the thlro 
rountrlt~s whose  nationals  m~st be  In  possession  of visas  when 
crossing  the cxll!rnal  borders  of the  Member  States,  OJ  I..  254, 
3.10.1995: Council Regulation  (EC)  No  1683/95 of 29  May  1995 
laylnz  down  a  uniform  format  for  visas,  OJ  L  164  ,  14.7.1995. 
Those  stlll  under  discussion  Include 
the  draft  Convention, 
;>roposed by  the Commission, on the control of persons crossing 
the external frontiers of the Member States, OJ  C 11.  \ 5.1.1994. 

*  •  • 

17 

* 
• 
• 
*  •  • 

• 
• 
• 

Citizens  of the  Union  will  not  have  tangible 
evidence  of  the  full  effects  of  the  internal 
market  until  controls  on  persons  at  internal 
frontiers have been eliminated. 

Schengen and revision of the  Treaties 

Spain, 

Belgium, 

the  context  of 

Since  26  March  1995,  seven  Member  States 
(Germany, 
France, 
Luxembourg,  Netherlands and  Portugal)  have 
achieved  an  area  without  internal  frontiers 
within 
the  Schengen 
Convention: 
these  Member  States  have 
abolished  controls  on  persons,  irrespective  of 
their nationality, at their common frontiers and 
have  implemented  all  the  flanking  measures 
necessary to establish  an area  that is  both free 
and secure. 

Work  is  under  way  to  enable  three  other 
Member  States  which  have  signed 
the 
Schengen  agreements  (Italy.  Greece  and 
Austria)  to  join  this  area  without  frontiers  in 
the course of 1997.  On 19 December 1996, the 
instruments  relating  to  the  accession  of 
Denmark,  Finland  and  Sweden 
the 
Schengen  agreements  were  signed,  as  was  a 
cooperation  agreement  with  Norway  and 
Iceland  aimed  at  maintaining  in  force  the 
Nordic  Union's  arrangements  on  passports. 
Consequently,  the  Schengen  Group  now  has 
thirteen members. 

to 

The Schengen initiative has always  been aimed 
at  achieving  the  objective  of  Article  7 a:  the 
Intergovernmental  Conference  is  therefore 
examining 
integrating 
the  possibility  of 
Schengen  into  the  Treaty  as  a  means  of 
achieving this objective throughout the Union. 
This  examination  falls  within  the scope  of the 
more  general  discussion  on  the  possibility  of 
introducing the principle of flexibiHty  into the 
Treaty. 

Ill.  THE  WAY  FORWARD:  IMPROVING  AWARENESS  AND  ACCESS  TO 

CITIZENS  RIGHTS 

related 

to  EU 

Citizenship of the Union is a reality.  As a  result 
of  the  Union,  citizens  now  enjoy  a  range  of 
In  the  past 
rights  affecting  their  daily  lives. 
three years,  further concrete progress has  been 
made  towards  the  implementation  of  rights 
citizenship. 
specifically 
Legislation  has  been  adopted  by  the  EU's 
Council of Ministers giving  EU  nationals living 
in  another  Member  State  the  right  to  vote  in 
European  Parliament  and  municipal  elections 
in their country of residence.  EU governments 
have  agreed  rules  on  providing  consular 
protection  in  third  countries  to  EU  nationals 
whose  own  Member  State  is  not  represented. 
The  European  Ombudsman  has  been 
to  consider  complaints  about 
appointed 
administrative irregularities by  the Community 
institutions or bodies. 

Citizens  are  entitled  to  be  aware  of the  rights 
conferred on them by the EU and to have these 
rights  honoured  in  practice  by  the  Member 
States.  Otherwise,  citizens  will  regard  EU 
citizenship  as  a  vague,  intangible  concept 
which means very little in reality. 

Citizens will  feel that the EU is of direct benefit 
to  them  if the  Commission  and  the  Member 
States together ensure that: 

•  *  • 
.. 
-· 
• 
18 
•  ~-~~-~--~-----·-
• 
• 
*  •  • 

Communication 

Raising awareness- promoting dialogue 

"Citizens  First"  was 
launched  on  26th 
November  1996  to  increase  people's awareness 
about the rights and opportunities they have in 
the  Union.  The  initiative  represents  the  most 
information  exercise  ever 
comprehensive 
the  Commission  and  the 
undertaken  by 
European Parliament, who are working in close 
co-operation with  the Member States and  non 
governmental organisations.  It was put in place 
as  part of the commitment to  bring the  Union 
closer  to  the  citizen  entered  into  by  President 
Santer 
the 
inaugural  address 
European Parliament in January  1995. 

in  his 

to 

The mechanism is simple. People are informed 
by means of advertising and the press that they 
enjoy  rights  as  a  result  of  the  EU.  and  are 
invited  to  call  a  free  or  low  cost  telephone 

number  or  consult  an  Internet  site  to  obtain 
more  information. 
In  response  to  their 
particular interests,  individuals can request,  or 
download  directly  from  the  Internet,  short, 
user-friendly  guides  on  general  topics.  These 
guides  are  available  in  the  11  official  EU 
languages,  plus Luxembourgish, Welsh,  Gaelic, 
Catalan, Basque and Galician. 
The guides are supported by a large number of 
detailed factsheets that explain exactly what the 
citizen must do in each Member State in order 
to  exercise  particular  individual  rights.  The 
factsheets  provide  useful  contact  points  with 
the national authorities and indicate the means 
of recourse  available  to citizens.  Each  national 
factsheet  is  available  in all  the  Union's official 
languages. 

In terms  of direct action  to obtain guides  and 
factsheets,  over 450,000 people have contacted 
Citizens First.  Over 200,000 have  made phone 
calls,  and  over  250  000  people  have 
downloaded  more than  1. 7 million documents 
from  the Citizens First Internet site.  Calls  have 
been coming in from every country in the EU. 
The  highest  response  levels  so  far  are  from 
Italy,  Spain,  France  and  Germany.  As  a 
percentage  of households,  Ireland  and  Spain 
have  the  highest  rates.  Strong  responses  are 
also  evident  from  Luxembourg,  Portugal, 
Greece and Finland. 

People witi1  specific practical problems can use 
of the  Citizens  First  "Signpost  Service".  They 
simply  call  the  same  telephone  number to  be 
put  in  touch  with  an  expert  who  gives  them 
informal  guidance  about  their  problem  and 
"signpostse  them back to the relevent national 
and  local  organisations  for  further· help.  The 
aim of th2  Signpost Service  is  to  reinforce  the 
role  of  national  and  local  bodies  who  are 
responsible for administering Community law. 

rights, 

recognition 

The  most  common  themes  characterising  the 
first  1,000  Signpost  cases  relate  to  social 
security 
of 
the 
qualifications,  the  registration  of  vehicles, 
rights  of residence  and  establishment,  double 
taxation,  equality  of treatment  and  issues  on 
studying  in  another  Member  State.  The 
inquiries  received  are  being  analysed  by  the 
Commission  with  a  view  to  identifying  where 
legislation  should  be  simplified,  or  better 
enforced  or  where  administrative  procedures 
could be improved. 

buying goods and services in the Single Market, 
travelling 
equal 
opportunities and health issues. 

throughout 

the  EU, 

A permanent  effort  is  required  on  the  part of 
the  Commission,  the  Parliament  and  the 
Member States to guarantee that a high level of 
factual  information  which  may  be  constantly 
updated  will  provide  citizens  with  a  reliable 
source of information  for  the exercise of their 
rights.  This  need  for  a  permanent  effort  to 
inform citizens has also been highlighted by the 
conclusions of the High Level Panel on the free 
movement of people chaired  by  Mme.  Simone 
Veil.  Building  on  experience  the  Commission 
considers  that  a  permanent  mechanism  is 
necessary  for  dialogue  with  citizens  on  their 
right  and  how  to  exercise  them  and  has  now 
put forward  specific  proposals.  These  initiaves 
should  help  to  make  the  process  of European 
integration  more  relevant  to  the  individual 
citizens. 

Enforcement 

Reinforcing co-operation - increasing transparency 

,, 
c 

for 

prime 

responsibility 

the 
The 
implementation of Community law lies with the 
Member States  themselves.  This  role  has to  be 
particulary  active  since,  according  to  the 
jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice, 
national  jurisdictions  may  oblige  Member 
States  to  pay  financial  compensation  to  a 
plaintiff  for  a  damage  linked  to  a  breach  of 
Community law51.That said the Commission,  in 
its  capacity  as  guardian  of  the  Treaties,  must 
make  sure  that  Member  States  fulfil  their 
responsibilities. 

From  a  citizen's  point  of  view  the  prime 
concern  is 
to  have  the  rights  conferred 
thoroughly  enforced.  This  entails  access  to 
speedy  and  effective  complaints  channels. 
Member States should set up clearly identified 
contact  points  for  citizens  who  encounter  a 
problem  either  in  their  own  or  in  another 
Member. 

Nevertheless  co-operation with  Member States · 
could  further  be  increased,  for  instance 
through  the  extension  of  the  co-operation 
between  national  administrations,  already  in 
place  for  the  enforcement  of  Single  Market 
legislation,  to  areas  dealing  specifically  with 

Citizens  First  is  also  granting  support  to 
projects  run  mainly  by  non-governmental 
organisations  designed  to  spread  the  message 
of rights for citizens in the Single Market.  Four 
Guides are now being prepared for publication 
in  the  Autumn.  The  topics  to  be  covered  are 

~·  judgement  14.11.1991. Joined  cases  C6-9/90,  ECR,  1991,  I-5357 
(Frankovlch), Judgement 5.3.1996, joined cases C-46-48/93, ECR 
1996,  I-1029  (Brasserle  du  P6cheur), Judgement  23.5.1996,  case 
C-5/94, ECR  1996, I-2553  {Lomas),Judgement 8.10.1996, case C-
178/94, ECR  1996  {Dillenkofer) 

..  ..  * 

. 
.  .. 

19 

• • • 

.. 

_, 
• 

citizens  rights 52
•  This would  allow  for  example 
to  increase  bilateral  information  exchanges 
between  the  Commission's  services  and  the 
authorities  concerned with  implementation  in 
the Member States in order to identify problem 
areas  and  avoid  erroneous  application  of the 
agreed rules. 

of 

Iv1ember States also need to have more effective 
channels 
amongst 
themselves  to  exchange  information.  Member 
States  should  set  up  specific  'clearing  houses' 
their 
for  resolving  problems  notified  by 

communication 

counterparts  in  other  Member  States.  These 
decentralised structures should resolve as many 
pi'Oblems concerning citizens' rights as  possible 
on a pragmatic basis and quickly,  thus avoiding 
the need fer legal proceedings. 

Where  informal  contacts  fail  to  resolve  a 
problem, 
legal  proceedings  may  still  be 
necessary.  In this case, citizens have the option 
to  invoke  EU  law  at  the  national  level  and 
possibly  obtain  financial  compensation  for 
damages  which  they  suffer  as  a  result  of  the 
breach of Community law.  However,  there are 
two  major obstacles to putting this option into 
practice.  First,  the complexity of the rules and 
secondly  a lack of knowledge of EU law  on the 
?art  of  lawyers,  judges  and  other  legal 
practitioners  within  the  Member  States.  The 
Robert Schuman project is  an  example of how 
a  better knowledge  of Community  law  may  be 
fostered. 
3ut  further  efforts  should  be 
deployed  towards  a  simplification  and  an 
increased knowledge of the existing rules. 

the 

constantly 

For  its  part  the  Commission  will  continue  to 
monitor 
application  of 
Community  law  and  follow  up  on  individual 
complaints submitted by citizens50
•  In pursuing 
its  obligation  to  check whether  the  rules  have 
been  implemented  correctly,  the  Commission 
will  not  hesitate  to  highlight  discrepancies 
between Member States'  political statements of 
support for the Single  Market and their actual 

record  on  respecting  the  rules  concerni•--.g 
citizens'  EU 
rights.  Through  greater 
transparency  in  its  infringement  procedures, 
the Commission will encourage ";Jeer pressure" 
from  other Member States,  plus pressure  from 
citizens,  on  Member  States  whc  fail  to  ensure 
that  citizens'  EU  rights  are  scrupulously 
Infringement 
respected. 
proceedings 
themselves  should  be  further  accelerated  se 
that  complaints  from  :ndividuai  citizens  are 
followed  up  as  quickly  as  possible.  To  achieve 
this,  a  re-allocation  of  reso·.1rces  within  the 
Commission's services will  he necessary. 

Commission  infringement proceedings against 
individuar  Member  States  will 
therefore 
continue  to  play  a  crucial  role,  particularly 
where  there  are  persistent  prcblert1s  and/or 
where Member States  refuse w  cooperate with 
informal attempts to resolve a  problem. 

New initiatives 

In  the  following  months,  the  Commission will 
look  into  issues 
linked  with  freedom  of 
movement of people in the light of the Report 
to  the 
by  the  High  Level  Panel  presented 
Commission  on  18  March  1997,  the  priority 
areas  indicated  in  the  Action  Plan  for  the 
Single  Market  and  of the  conclusions  of  the 
Intergovernmental Conference on the revision 
of the Treaties. The reactions from the Council 
and the European  Parliament to this  report as 
well  as  the  feedback  from  the  Citizens  First! 
initiative  will  further  assist  the  Commission  to 
identify further steps that may be taken. 

'

2  Cf.  Council  Resolution  of 8 July  1996  on  cooperation  between 
administration s for the enforcement of legislation In the Internal 
market which calls on the Commission and the Member States to 
examine  as  a  matter  of  priority  the  possibility  of  reinforcing 
administrative cooperation In  the other aereas, In 
C 
224/4 of 1.8.1996. Cf. also Council Resolution of 16 June 1994  In 
OJ C 179/1  of 1.7.1994 and  Commission's progress report COM 
(96)  20 final  of 29.1.1996. 

OJ 

"  A  standard  form  to  submit  complaints  to  the  Commission  is 
published  In  0] C 26/7 of 1.2.1989.  Citizens are encouraged  to 
use  it but  complaints  may  also  be  filed  simply  by  addressing  a 
letter to the  Commission containing as much Information about 
the case as  possible. 

~.· 
~,~. 

) 

.. . .. 
.. 
.. 
20 
• 
.. 
• 
• 
• • •