COMMON POSITION (EC) No 22/98 adopted by the Council on 9 March 1998 with a view to adopting European Parliament and Council Decision No .../98/EC of ..., establishing an action programme to improve awareness of Community law within the legal professions (Robert Schuman project)
Date: 1998-03-09
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU law, action programme, application of EU law, legal profession, legal status

30.4.98

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

C  135/25

COMMON  POSITION  (EC)  No  22/98

adopted  by  the  Council  on  9  March  1998

with  a  view  to  adopting  European  Parliament  and  Council  Decision  No  . . ./98/EC  of  . . .,
establishing  an  action  programme  to  improve  awareness  of  Community  law  within  the  legal
professions  (Robert  Schuman  project)

(98/C  135/03)

THE  EUROPEAN  PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  COUNCIL  OF
THE  EUROPEAN  UNION,

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European
Community,  and  in  particular  Article  100a  thereof,

Having  regard  to  the  proposal  from  the  Commission (1),

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social
Committee (2),

Acting  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  laid  down  in
Article  189b  of  the  Treaty (3),

(1)  Whereas Declaration No 19 on the implementation
of Community law annexed to the Final Act of the
Treaty  on  European  Union  stresses  that  it  is
essential 
the
Community  that  the  measures  taken  by  the
different  Member 
in
States 
Community  law  being  applied  with  the  same
effectiveness  and  rigour  as  in  the  application  of
their  national  law;

functioning  of 

the  proper 

should 

result 

for 

(2)  Whereas the completion of the internal market has
required  a  considerable  legislative  effort  involving,
inter alia, the approximation of national laws with
a  view  to  creating  an  area  without 
internal
frontiers;

(3)  Whereas  the  effective  and  uniform  application  of
the  Community  rules  in  question  represents  a  new
priority  which 
smooth
to 
is  essential 
functioning  of  the  internal  market;

the 

(4)  Whereas  those  Community  rules  on  the  freedoms
of the internal market which have direct effect may
be invoked before any national court in accordance

(1)  OJ  C  378,  13.12.1996,  p.  17,  and  OJ  C  368,  5.12.1997,

p. 6.

(2)  OJ  C  206,  7.7.1997,  p.  63.
(3)  Opinion  of  the  European  Parliament  of  24  October  1997
(OJ  C  339,  10.11.1997,  p.  410),  Council  Common  Position
of  9  March  1998  and  Decision  of  the  European  Parliament
of  . . .  (not  yet  published  in  the  Official  Journal).

with  procedures  defined  by  national  law;  whereas
citizens,  consumers  and  undertakings  must  be  able
to  rely  on  the  application  of  those  rules  and  to
benefit  from  the  rights  and  guarantees  which  they
confer  in  the  Member  States  as  a  whole;  whereas
legal  certainty  and  the  credibility  of  the  internal
is,  more  generally,
market  are  at  stake  as 
confidence  in  the  whole  process  of  European
integration;

(5)  Whereas  citizens,  consumers  and  undertakings  will
be  unable  to  assert  all  their  rights  under  the
Community  legal  order  before  any  national  court
unless those members of the legal professions most
directly  involved  in  applying  Community  law,
namely 
lawyers,  are
sufficiently  informed  and  trained  to  do  so;

judges,  prosecutors  and 

(6)  Whereas  the  Commission  communication  to  the
Council of 22 December 1993 entitled ‘Making the
most  of  the  internal  market:  Strategic  programme’
emphasises  the  importance,  for  individuals  as  well
as  for  the  smooth  functioning  of  the  internal
market,  of  national  courts’  being  in  a  position  to
resolve a larger proportion of cases concerning the
conformity  of  rules  or  conduct  with  Community
law  and,  to  that  end,  the  need  to 
improve
knowledge  of  Community  law  within  the  legal
professions;

(7)  Whereas in its Resolution of 13 February 1996 on
the  Commission’s  12th  Annual  Report  on
monitoring  the  application  of  Community  law (4)
the European Parliament asked the Commission to
put  forward  a  programme  for  the  purpose  of
training  and  informing  the  legal  professions  in  the
field of Community law with a view to making the
application  of  Community  law  by  national  courts
more  uniform  and  effective;

(4)  OJ  C  65,  4.3.1996,  p.  37.

C  135/26

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

30.4.98

(8)  Whereas  raising  awareness  of  Community  law
among  members  of  the  legal  professions  involved
in  the  administration  of  justice  in  the  Member
States  is  likely  to  improve  cooperation  between
national  courts  and  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the
European  Communities  which  is  an  inherent  part
of  the  Community  legal  order;

Article  2

Objectives

1. The  Robert  Schuman  project  shall  have  as 
purpose:

its

(9)  Whereas,  in  accordance  with  the  principle  of
subsidiarity  and  by  virtue  of  Article  127  of  the
Treaty,  it  is  not  for  the  European  Community  to
assume 
in
determining the organisation or content of training
for  members  of  the  legal  professions  involved  in
the  administration  of 
judges,
prosecutors  and  lawyers;

the  Member  States 

justice,  namely 

the  role  of 

(10)  Whereas  it  is  within  the  Community’s  remit  to
propose the establishment of support arrangements
designed  to  help  Member  States  to  remedy  a  lack
of  training  and  information  wherever  this  may
affect  the  correct  application  of  Community  law
necessary  for  the  smooth  functioning  of  the
internal  market;

(11)  Whereas  the  objective  of  making  members  of  the
legal  professions  involved  in  the  administration  of
justice,  namely  judges,  prosecutors  and  lawyers,
more  aware  of  Community  law  must  from  part  of
overall  arrangements  which,  from  checks  on  the
correct  transposition  into  national  legislation  of
Community  law  to  the  penalties  applicable  in  the
event  of  that  law  being  breached,  are  designed  to
ensure the effective and uniform application of the
rules  governing  the  internal  market;

(12)  Whereas  achieving  this  objective  entails  using
specific  resources  adapted  to  the  requirements  and
constraints  of  professional  practice;  whereas  the
creation  of  a  specific  instrument,  the  objective  of
which is to improve knowledge of Community law
on  the  part  of  members  of  legal  professions
involved  in  the  administration  of  justice  in  the
Member  States,  namely  judges,  prosecutors  and
lawyers, 
existing  Community
programmes  and  initiatives  as  far  as  the  particular
target  group  is  concerned,

complements 

HAVE  DECIDED  AS  FOLLOWS:

Article  1

Establishment  of  the  Robert  Schuman  project

1. This  Decision  establishes  the  programme  known  as
the  ‘Robert  Schuman  project’  for  a  period  of  three
years.

2. By  means  of  this  financial  support  instrument,  the
Community  intends  to  encourage  and  support  initiatives
designed  to  raise  awareness  of  Community  law  among
members  of  the 
in  the
legal  professions 
administration  of  justice,  namely  judges,  prosecutors  and
lawyers  within  the  Member  States.

involved 

(a)  to  encourage  the  launch  of  training  initiatives  of  a
practical  nature  in  Community  law  in  the  Member
States  (initial  or  continuing  training)  by  bodies
responsible 
legal
professions  involved  in  the  administration  of  justice,
namely  judges,  prosecutors  and  lawyers  or  those
preparing  to  take  part  in  the  administration  of
justice;

training  members  of 

the 

for 

(b) to  encourage  the  development,  in  the  Member  States,
of information resources (traditional or based on new
in
communication  and 
Community  law  for  members  of  the  legal  professions
involved  in  the  administration  of  justice,  namely
judges,  prosecutors  and  lawyers;

information 

technology) 

(c)  to 

support 

facilitate
implementation  of  the  above  two  forms  of  support,
complement  them  or  enhance  their  impact.

initiatives 

likely 

to 

training 

2. The  Robert  Schuman  project  shall  support  and
complement 
information  work  on
and 
Community law undertaken by Member States, while not
encroaching  on  their  responsibility  for  defining  course
content  and  organising  vocational  training.

Article  3

Instrument  of  Community  intervention

1. The  Robert  Schuman  project  shall  be  designed  to
provide  financial  support  to  initiatives  launched  in  the
Member  States  with  a  view  to  achieving  the  objectives
referred  to  in  Article  2.

2. Each of those objectives shall correspond to a specific
aspect  of 
‘training’,
the  Robert  Schuman  project: 
‘information’  or  ‘accompanying  initiatives’.

Article  4

Financial provisions

The  financial  framework  for  the  implementation  of  this
programme  for  a  period  of  three  years  commencing  on
the  date  of  entry  into  force  of  this  Decision  is  hereby  set
at  ECU  5,6  million.

The  annual  appropriations  shall  be  authorised  by  the
budgetary  authority  within  the  limits  of  the  financial
perspective.

30.4.98

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

C  135/27

Article  5

(c)  Adjustment  to  constraints  of  professional  practice

Eligibility conditions

Institutions responsible in the Member States at local,

1.
regional  or  national  level  or  at  Community  level  for:

—  the  continuing  vocational  training  of  members  of  the
legal  professions  involved  in  the  administration  of
justice,  namely  judges,  prosecutors  and  lawyers,

or

—  the  initial  vocational  training  of  those  preparing  to

take  part  in  the  administration  of  justice

shall be considered eligible for financial support under
the  Robert  Schuman  project.

2. The  institutions  covered  by  paragraph  1  shall  be:

(a)  the  courts,

(b) bar  associations  and  equivalent  professional  bodies,

(c)  Ministries of Justice, high councils of the judiciary or
similar  bodies  and  bodies  responsible  at  a  high  level
for  the  training  of  the  judiciary  and  judicial  officers,

(d) approved  vocational  schools  or  educational  institutes
responsible  for  the  initial  or  continuing  training  of
members  of  the  legal  professions  involved  in  the
administration  of  justice,  namely  judges,  prosecutors
and lawyers,

(e)  the  universities.

Article  6

Project  selection  criteria

1. Eligible  institutions  shall  apply  for  support  under  the
Robert  Schuman  project  by  submitting  a  training,
information  or  accompanying  project  to  the  competent
Commission  departments.

2. Projects  shall  be  selected,  and  financial  support
awarded,  on  the  basis  of  the  following  criteria:

(a)  Practical use

The measures envisaged must enable the target groups
to  acquire  knowledge  adapted  to,  and  immediately
useful  in,  the  day-to-day  practice  of  their  profession.

(b) Accessibility

The  measures  envisaged  must  be  designed  to  raise
awareness  among  the  greatest  possible  number  of
members  of  the  legal  professions  involved  in  the
administration  of  justice,  namely  judges,  prosecutors
and  lawyers,  and  shall,  in  particular,  benefit  those
who  have  not  yet  become  acquainted  with
Community  law.

The  way 
in  which  the  measures  envisaged  are
implemented  must  reflect  the  needs  of  professional
practice  (particularly  in  terms  of  timetabling  and
geographical proximity).

(d) Cost-effectiveness

financial  management, 

When  assessing  projects  submitted  under  the  Robert
Schuman  project,  the  Commission  shall  work  on  the
basis  of  the  principles  laid  down  by  the  relevant
financial  Regulations,  in  particular  the  principles  of
sound 
and
cost-effectiveness.
Costs  entailed  by  the  measures  envisaged  shall  be
reasonable  having 
their  objectives.
regard 
Cost-effectiveness  may  be  improved  by  partnerships
involving  a  number  of  eligible  institutions  pooling
their  resources.

economy 

to 

3. The  following  optional  assessment  criteria  shall  also
be  taken  into  account:

(a)  the 

inter-professional  dimension  of  measures
(involvement  of  judges,  prosecutors  and  lawyers  in
implementing  them  or  as  target  groups),

(b) the  cross-border  dimension  of  measures  (involvement
of  nationals  of  more  than  one  Member  State  in
implementing  them  or  as  target  groups).

Article  7

Support  arrangements

1. Financial  support  under  the  Robert  Schuman  project,
which is designed to encourage, complement and support
the work of the institutions referred to in Article 5, shall
be  provided  in  addition  to  local,  regional  or  national
funds  and  shall  be  used  to  achieve  projects.  Financial
support  thus  awarded  may  not,  therefore,  entail  the
realisation  of  direct  or  indirect  profits.

2. Financial  support  under  the  Robert  Schuman  project
shall  be  awarded  for  one  or  two  years.

3. So  as  to  ensure  continuity  in  the  projects,  the
recipient  of  a  Robert  Schuman  project  grant  shall
undertake  to  continue  the  project  without  support  from
the  Commission,  as  from  the  date  on  which  the  grant
ceases, for a period equivalent to that for which the grant
was made.

Recipients shall undertake to repay all amounts disbursed
if  they  fail  to  meet  that  obligation.

Exceptionally,  a  derogation  from  the  obligation  to
continue  the  work  may  be  granted  if  the  nature  of  a
project  prevents  its  continuation  or  if  the  recipient  is
confronted  by  circumstances,  notably  of  an  internal
regulatory  or  financial  nature,  which  prevent  the  project
from  being  continued.

C  135/28

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

30.4.98

4. Financial 
the  Robert
support  provided  under 
Schuman project shall be awarded in accordance with the
Commission’s  rules  governing  grants.  Compliance  with
those rules shall be monitored by the Community and the
Court  of  Auditors  of  the  European  Communities.

teaching  on  European  integration  at  university  level  and
the  Grotius  programme  of  incentives  and  exchanges  for
legal  practitioners  (joint  action  adopted  on  the  basis  of
Article  K.3  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union).

Article  8

Implementation

1. The Commission shall be responsible for carrying out
this  programme  and  shall  adopt  practical  arrangements
for  its  implementation.

2. A  call  for  expressions  of  interest  shall  be  published
each  year  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European
inform  potential  applicants  of  the
Communities  to 
Robert  Schuman  project’s  objectives  and  the  conditions
governing  the  award  of  grants.

Article  9

Consistency  of  Community  action

1. The Commission shall be responsible, jointly with the
Member  States,  for  ensuring  the  overall  consistency  of
this  programme  and  other  Community  training  or
information initiatives

2. The Robert Schuman project shall complement action
carried  out  under  other  Community  programmes,  in
particular  the  Leonardo  da  Vinci  programme  for  the
implementation  of  a  European  Community  vocational
training  policy,  the  Jean  Monnet  project  to  promote

Article  10

Assessment  and  monitoring

1. The  Commission  shall  be  responsible  for  assessing
and  monitoring  this  programme  on  a  periodic  basis  and
shall  keep  the  Member  States  regularly  informed.

2. The  Commission  shall  submit  an  assessment  report
on  implementation  of  the  programme  to  the  European
Parliament,  the  Council,  the  Economic  and  Social
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  no  later
than  two  years  after  the  programme  enters  into  force.

Article  11

Entry  into  force

This  Decision  shall  enter  into  force  on  the  day  of  its
publication  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European
Communities.

Done  at  . . .

For  the  Parliament

For  the  Council

The  President

The  President

30.4.98

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

C  135/29

STATEMENT  OF  THE  COUNCIL’S  REASONS

I. 

INTRODUCTION

On  22  November  1996  the  Commission  submitted  a  proposal  for  a  Decision  based  on
Article  100a  of  the  EC  Treaty.

The  Economical  and  Social  Committee  delivered  its  opinion  on  23  April  1997.

The  European  Parliament  delivered  its  opinion  on  19  October  1997.

Further  to  the  European  Parliament’s  opinion,  the  Commission  submitted  an  amended
proposal  by  letter  dated  10  November  1997.

The  Council  adopted  its  common  position  in  accordance  with  Article  189b  of  the  Treaty
on  9  March  1998.

II.  COMMON  POSITION

In its opinion at first reading the European Parliament proposed a number of amendments,
principally designed to specify the groups at which the measure was targeted and to allow
for recipients to be exempted from the undertaking to continue projects after the period for
which  they  had  received  financial  support.

The  Commission’s  amended  proposal 
amendments,  with  an  adjustment  to  the  wording  of  Amendment  19.

incorporated  all  the  European  Parliament’s

III.  AIM

The  aim  of  the  Decision  is  to  improve  the  awareness  of  Community  law  within  the  legal
professions  and  thereby  to  encourage  effective  and  uniform  application  of  the  Community
rules  on  which  the  smooth  functioning  of  the  internal  market  relies.

The  Robert  Schuman  project  is  intended  as  a  temporary  programme  offering  financial
support for measures implemented by institutions in the Member States providing training
and  information  to  members  of  the  legal  professions  involved  in  the  administration  of
justice,  namely  judges,  prosecutors  and  lawyers.

The  Council  has  accordingly  adopted  nearly  all  of  the  text  proposed  by  the  Commission,
clarifying  certain  aspects  and  simplifying  others  in  line  with  the  declared  aim.

IV.  ANALYSIS  OF  THE  COMMON  POSITION

1.  Recitals

The Council has followed the Commission’s amended proposal, which was aligned on
the  European  Parliament’s  proposed  amendments  for  recitals  11,  12  and  part  of
recitals 5 and 8, and adopted the more precise wording suggested by the Parliament to
designate  the  project’s  target  groups.

The Council decided not to adopt the European Parliament’s proposed amendment to
recital  6,  since  ‘the  legal  professions’  was  the  term  used  in  the  communication  of  22
December  1993  and  not  a  reference  to  the  groups  targeted  by  the  Robert  Schuman
project.

C  135/30

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

30.4.98

The  Council  also  decided  against  adopting  the  European  Parliament’s  proposed  new
recital  3a  (amendment  1).  It  considered  that  the  ideas  contained  in  the  proposed  new
recital  were  already  to  be  found,  albeit  with  a  different  wording,  in  recitals  3  and  6
(second  part).

A  minor  amendment  proposed  by  the  European  Parliament  to  recital  10  was  not
adopted  by  the  Council,  which  found  the  wording  of  the  original  proposal  more
appropriate.

The  European  Parliament  also  proposed  a  new  recital  10a  (amendment  6),  which
highlighted the role of the legal professions in the application of Community law. The
Council  considered  that  the  substance  of  this  recital  was  already  amply  covered  by
recitals  5,  6,  7,  8  and  10,  making  an  additional  recital  superfluous.

2.  Establishment  of  the  Robert  Schuman  Project  (Article  1(1))

The  Council  decided  to  accept  the  European  Parliament’s  amendment  regarding  the
project’s  duration  and  to  state  clearly  that  the  programme  is  established  for  three
years.  It  chose  not  to  add  the  proposed  description  of  the  aim  of  the  project,  which
the  Council  considered  belonged  in  the  recitals.

3.  Target groups of the project (Article 1(2), Article 2(1)(a) and (b), Article 4(1) and 2(d)

and  Article  5(2)(b))

The  Council  incorporated  European  Parliament  amendments  10,  11,  12,  13  (second
part),  15  and  17,  which  were  designed  to  define  the  project’s  target  groups  more
clearly.

4.  Reference  to  Article  1(1)  (Article  4(1))

The Council decided not to add the reference to Article 1(1), because candidates were
eligible for financial support under the Decision as a whole and not just under Article
1(1).

5.  Universities  as  institutions  eligible  for  financial  support  (Article  5(2)(e))

The  Council  accepted  the  European  Parliament’s  amendment  making  all  universities
eligible  for  financial  support.

6. 

Inter-professional  dimension  of  measures  (Article  6(3)(a))

The  Council  accepted  the  spirit  of  the  European  Parliament  amendment  spelling  out
the  scope  of  inter-professional  measures  but  used  what  it  felt  was  a  clearer  wording.

7.  Support  agreement  (Article  7)

The  Council  accepted  the  European  Parliament’s  amendment  specifying  that  financial
support  is  awarded  for  one  or  two  years.  It  also  accepted  the  amendment  allowing
recipients  to  be  dispensed  from  the  obligation  to  continue  their  project  beyond  the
period  covered  by  the  grant  but  laid  down  the  conditions  for  the  derogation.

8.  Financial  provisions  (Article  4)

The  Council  did  not  incorporate  the  European  Parliament’s  proposed  new  Article
6(4a)  or  the  reference  to  budgetary  complementarity  in  Article  8  but  accepted  the
Parliament’s  idea  that  the  Decision  should  incorporate  a  reference  to  financial
provisions, which have been modelled on the Declaration of the European Parliament,
the  Council  and  the  Commission  of  6  March  1995  on  the  incorporation  of  financial
provisions  into  legislative  acts.

30.4.98

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

C  135/31

9.  Consistency  of  Community  action  (Article  9)

The Council decided not to make the European Parliament’s proposed addition to this
Article, namely that the programme would operate in synergy with other Community
programmes,  on  the  grounds  that  this  idea  was  already  implicit  in  the  original
wording  of  Article  9(2).

10.  Assessment  and  monitoring  (Article  10)

The Council slightly adjusted paragraph 1 of Article 10 in the interests of clarity and
did  not  think  it  advisable  to  specify  the  content  of  the  report,  since  it  is  for  the
Commission  to  decide  on  the  scope  and  modalities  of  its  report.

V.  CONCLUSION

The  common  position  incorporates  most  of  the  European  Parliament’s  amendments,
sometimes  with  slightly  different  wording  to  make  the  text  more  readable,  and  keeps  very
close  to  the  Commissions’s  amended  proposal,  fully  reflecting  the  European  Parliament’s
thinking  and  objectives.

The  Council’s  efforts  were  mainly  focused  on  producing  a  clear  text  that  could  be  readily
understood, while reflecting the European Parliament’s principal concerns, particularly with
regard  to  the  institutions  eligible  for  financial  support  the  project’s  target  groups  and
support  arrangements.