WRITTEN QUESTION E-2261/99 by Marie Isler Béguin (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The recognition of foreign diplomas.
Date: 1999-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: appeals by private individuals, recognition of diplomas

C 303 E/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2000)

The Commission is unaware of the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member.

There has been no funding of the liquefied gas tank farm at Alumbres (Spain) by either the European
Regional Development Fund (ERDF) or the Cohesion Fund.

The facilities mentioned by this question could be covered by Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December
1996, on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (1). That directive requires
any necessary action to be taken in order to prevent major accidents involving dangerous substances and
in order to limit their effects on both human beings and the environment where such industrial accidents
take place. The implementation of Directive 96/82/EC depends on the quantity of the substances stored in
those facilities. Articles 11 and 12 of Directive 96/82/EC set out in detail the obligations that are
incumbent on the Member States with regard to urgency and intended town-planning-restrictions.
Directive 96/82/EC has been transposed into Spanish law via (cid:145)the R.D. 1254/1999, de 16 de julio, por el
que se aprueban medidas de control de los riesgos inherentes a los accidentes graves en los que
intervengan sustancias peligrosas.(cid:146)

The Commission does not know whether the facilities at issue have been subjected to the impact
assessment procedure provided for by Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment
of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment. It should, however, be noted that
Article 2 of that directive provides that any projects that are likely to have a significant impact on the
environment, more particularly as a result of their nature, extent or location, must be subjected to an
assessment of their impact before any authorisation is granted. That provision applies to the projects listed
in Annexes I and II to the directive. Article 4.2 provides that the projects listed in Annex II must be
subjected to said procedure if the Member States feel that their characteristics so require. Storage facilities
for petroleum, petrochemical and chemical products are listed in Annex II to the aforementioned directive.
Thus projects falling within this category are assessed in accordance with Articles 5-10 of the directive
where the Member State feels that their characteristics so require. It should be noted that Directive 85/337/
EEC has been amended by Directive 97/11/EC (2). However, under Article 3.2 of Directive 97/11/EC, the
provisions of Directive 85/337/EEC, in the version applying before the amendment, shall apply if a request
for authorisation has been submitted before 14 March 1999.

The information provided by the Honourable Member do not enable it to be confirmed that there has been
an infringement of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information
on the environment (3). In any case it should be noted that Article 4 of Directive 90/313/EEC lays down
that: (cid:145)A person who considers that his request for information has been unreasonably refused or ignored,
or has been inadequately answered by the public authority, may seek a judicial or administrative review of
the decision in accordance with the relevant national legal system.(cid:146) Directive 90/313/EEC was transposed
into Spanish law by Law 38/1995 of 13 December 1995.

The Commission will contact the Spanish authorities in order to invite them to provide information on the
action intended by the authorities in order to guarantee that this project will not have a serious impact on
the environment and will not impair the quality of life of the inhabitants of Alumbres.

(1) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.

(2000/C 303 E/035)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2261/99

by Marie Isler BØguin (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: The recognition of foreign diplomas

(13 December 1999)

The EC Treaty, which provides for the free movement of workers, freedom of establishment and freedom
to provide services as well as the general recognition of educational or professional training qualifications,
is not respected.

24.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 303 E/39

foreign diplomas, the host Member State cannot deny
According to the system for recognition of
European citizens access to a profession covered by European legislation if they are qualified to exercise
that profession in their native country. At present, the harmonisation and recognition of foreign diplomas
of Member States have not yet been brought up to date (cid:129) for example, the nursery school teacher(cid:146)s
diploma (Belgium-France), the diploma in architecture (France-Greece), etc.

These administrative practices bring about situations of social and professional exclusion at the heart of a
Europe which advocates the elimination of frontiers.

The Commission has decided to bring France and Greece before the European Court of Justice for
infringement of Community legislation.

What are the steps to be taken and what are the appeal options open for European citizens who are
refused a job on the grounds that they do not hold a recognised foreign diploma?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

The general system is based on the concept of mutual recognition which implies the assumption that
national qualifications within the Community can be considered to be of equal value. This principle has
been applied to those regulated professions for which the minimum training required has not been
co-ordinated at the Community level (1). The (cid:145)host(cid:146) Member State has to compare the qualification of an
In case of significant
applicant from another (the (cid:145)home(cid:146)) Member State with its own requirements.
differences, the host Member State may require an aptitude test, an adaptation period or professional
experience.

Each Member State is responsible for the implementation of Community law within its own legal system.
The directives creating the general system, which have been implemented almost completely by all
Member States, are mainly 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(cid:146) duration (2) and Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second
general system for the recongition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/
EEC (3). Directive 89/48/EEC has not yet been completely implemented in Greece. The Commission has
referred the matter to the Court of justice and asked for a penalty payment pursuant to Article 228(2)
EC Treaty (ex Article 171). Furthermore, the basic rights of citizens under the general system are directly
applicable in the Member States. Thus, citizens can claim these rights before national courts and can make
use of national legal remedies, which must be available in each Member State (4). It is essentially up to the
national courts to find out whether, in an individual case, Community law has been infringed by national
authorities. In this context, national courts can ask the Court of justice to issue a preliminary ruling on the
interpretation of Community law.

Under the Treaties, the Commission is responsible for ensuring that Community law is correctly applied.
Consequently, where a Member State fails to comply with Community law, the Commission has powers of
its own (action for non-compliance) to try to bring the infringement to an end and, where necessary, may
refer the case to the Court of justice. The Commission takes whatever action it deems appropriate in
response to either a complaint or indications of infringements which it detects itself. It should be noted
that, for individual cases, infringement proceedings initiated by the Commission do not have the same
legal effect as a national legal action and can therefore not replace it.

Anyone may lodge a complaint with the Commission against a Member State for any measure
(law, regulation or administrative action) or practice attributable to a Member State which they consider
incompatible with a provision or a principle of Community law. Complainants do not have to demonstrate
a formal interest in bringing proceedings. Neither do they have to prove that they are principally and
directly concerned by the infringement. To be admissible, a complaint has to relate to an infringement of
Community law by a Member State. It cannot therefore concern a dispute between private individuals.

Citizens whose diplomas are not recognised can consult the national (cid:145)contact points(cid:146) for the recognition of
diplomas, a list of which is available at all of the information offices of the Commission. Individuals can

C 303 E/40

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

also get information on their rights under Community law through the (cid:145)Signpost Service(cid:146) (providing toll-
free phone numbers in all Member States) or via the Internet.

(1) The general system is not applicable to professions for which specific Community legislation harmonising the
minimum qualification requirements has been passed (for example: doctors, general care nurses, midwives, dentists,
pharmacists and to some extent also architects). For those professions, (cid:145)automatic(cid:146) recognition is foreseen.

(2) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
(3) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
(4) See Article 8(2) of Directive 89/48/EEC and Article 12(2) of Directive 92/51/EEC.

(2000/C 303 E/036)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2268/99

by Hans Kronberger (NI) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Recognition of a masseur(cid:146)s qualification in the EU

In a specific case the authorities in Lower Bavaria (Germany) rejected an Austrian national(cid:146)s application for
the recognition of his qualification on the following grounds:

Recognition on the basis of Directive 92/51/EEC (1) and thus pursuant to section 2(4) of the Law on
Masseurs and Physiotherapists is ruled out because these occupations do not conform to the German
career profile of the masseur and medical swimming pool attendant, even though the occupational
titles are identical in some respects.

When the applicant inquired at the Federal Ministry in Bonn, however, he was told the opposite, that it
was indeed possible for his training to be recognised pursuant to section 16 within the framework of the
EU directives.

The Commission is requested to answer the following questions:

1.

Is it lawful for the recognition of an Austrian national(cid:146)s qualification as masseur to be refused in
Germany?

2. What legal basis should actually be applied?

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 25.

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2000)

1.

Yes, insofar as the professions are different as explained below.

2.
In principle, the general system defined by 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(cid:146) duration (1) and 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 is intended to cover the recognition of higher-education diplomas and professional
qualifications within the Community, to the exclusion only of those exceptions provided for by the
Directives.

However, a number of conditions must be met; in particular, the persons concerned must be fully qualified
and must apply for recognition of their diplomas or qualifications in the Member State in which they
intend to exercise the profession for which they have been qualified in another Member State. If the
conditions of the Directives are not satisfied, a Member State can refuse to apply them. A decision to
refuse recognition must, of course, be reasoned, so that the grounds for exclusion from the Directives are
clear.