WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3758/98 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Further thoughts concerning private armed guards in Italy
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Italy, competence of the Member States, freedom to provide services, professional qualifications, security services, social security, vocational training

21.7.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 207/125

(1999/C 207/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3758/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Further thoughts concerning private armed guards in Italy

Further to Written Question E-1713/98 (1) on the regulation of private armed guards in Italy can the
Commission say:

1. whether there are Commission documents on recognition of the new professions which may, inter alia,
assist the recognition of the profession of private civilian security guards, who are currently included in
the general category of unskilled workers in Italy;

2. whether the special and sensitive nature of the sector, rightly pointed out by Commissioner Monti, should

not lead to private security guards being given the status of public servants;

3. whether it does not consider that failure to recognize this profession may have an adverse effect on both

the qualifications of private security guards and the social protection of workers?

(1) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999, p. 67.

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 1999)

1.
The Commission has not undertaken any special studies of private security services. With regard to the
recognition of the professional qualifications required in a Member State, the honourable Member is referred
to Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-
education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’
duration (1), as well as Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the
recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (2).

2.
Inasmuch as private security services constitute an economic activity under the meaning of the EC
Treaty, the Member States cannot exclude economic sectors from the application of the principle of non-
discrimination. It is an economic activity because the protection and surveillance activities are based on private
relations, and their exercise does not mean that the companies and staff have any powers of constraint. Simply
helping to maintain public safety, which any individual may be required to do, cannot be likened to powers of
constraint and cannot therefore be considered direct and specific involvement in the exercise of official
authority in accordance with Articles 55 and 48 (4) of the EC Treaty. The Commission’s position was
confirmed recently by the Court of Justice in the case of the Commission v Spain (ruling of 29 October 1998,
C-114/97).

3.
As far as Community law is concerned at the moment, the Member States are responsible for measures
relating to the training and social protection of those employed by private security companies. Inasmuch as
there is compliance with the principle of non-discrimination and recognition of professional qualifications in
accordance with the directives mentioned earlier, the Member State in question can adopt measures seeking a
general interest objective in compliance with the proportionality rule.

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(1999/C 207/169)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3765/98

by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Discrimination on the labour market

Does the Commission not think that sacking or discriminating against men who have long hair, wear earrings,
have their bodies pierced or dye their hair odd colours is an infringement of equal opportunities legislation
even if they were informed before being taken on that certain criteria had to be met in the workplace?