WRITTEN QUESTION E-2624/99 by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission. New legislation regarding foreigners in Romania.
Date: 2000-01-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Romania, accession to the European Union, foreign national, political rights, residence permit

3.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 280 E/87

However, the Commission is of the opinion that the rule of a sporting association which limits the number
of amateur players having the nationality of other Member States who may be fielded in a match is also
contrary to Community law, and notably to Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of
15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (2). That provision states
that Community workers are to be granted the same social and tax advantages as national workers. The
Court has ruled on several occasions that the provision applies to leisure activities (3) and it is indisputable
that practising sport as an amateur is a leisure activity.

Whether or not the sport practised by amateurs is an economic activity has to be judged on the basis of
the characteristics of the activity.

(1) Case C-415/93, [ECR] 1995, I-4921.
(2) OJ L 257, 19.10.1968.
(3) Case C-334/94 [ECR] 1996, I-1307.

(2000/C 280 E/089)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2624/99

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: New legislation regarding foreigners in Romania

The Defence Committee of the Chamber of Deputies in the Romanian Parliament has recently approved a
bill covering regulations for foreigners in Romania, a bill that was passed in the Romanian Senate on
10 September 1998. According to this bill, foreign citizens living in Romania would no longer be allowed
to finance or found political parties, organisations or political groups on Romanian soil, or take part in
demonstrations regarding the political life of the country.

In addition, every natural or legal person hosting foreigners for over five days should notify local police
authorities. Lastly, according to this bill, a residence permit may be issued only to those residents holding
medical insurance.

Does not the Commission believe that if this legislation, already passed by the Senate, should be adopted
in its present format by the Parliament in Bucharest, Romania would find itself in clear breach of its
commitments as a country applying for accession to the EU? What initiatives has the Commission already
taken or does it intend to take to dissuade the relevant Romanian authorities, beginning with the
Parliament, from proceeding to adopt this legislation in its current format?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2000)

The draft
law regarding the regime of aliens in Romania, which was adopted by the Senate on
10 September 1998, has not yet been adopted by the Chamber of Deputies. The present legislation
(Law No 25/1969 on the regime of aliens) is outdated and the Commission in its latest regular report on
Romania(cid:146)s progress towards accession adopted on 13 October 1999 (1) and the accession partnership
which the Council adopted on 6 December 1999 (2) stressed the need to replace this law with modern
legislation.

The Honourable Member refers to provisions in the draft law containing restrictions on the political
activity of aliens residing in Romania. Article 16 of the European Convention on human rights, which has
been ratified by Romania, permits the contracting parties to impose such restrictions.

The office of the United Nations high commissioner for refugees (UNHCR) in Romania has commented on
the proposed restrictions and has pointed out that according to the case law of the European Court of
human rights such restrictions must be proportionate. A restriction must not only pursue a legitimate aim,
but there must also be a reasonable proportionality between the means employed and that legitimate aim
which is sought to be realised. However, UNHCR has not argued that the provisions which are now in
question are disproportionate.

C 280 E/88

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.10.2000

As a member of the Union following accession, Romania will have to respect the rights ensuing from the
citizenship of the Union. According to Article 19 of the EC Treaty every citizen of the Union residing in a
Member State of which he is not a national has the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal
elections in the Member State in which he resides. Citizenship of the Union also entitles to vote and to
stand as a candidate in the country of residence in elections to the European Parliament. To stand as a
candidate in elections presupposes membership of a political party and consequently the possibility to
carry out political activities and to contribute to financing a party (through membership fees in the first
place). Thus the restrictions in question would be, upon accession, contrary to Article 19. Although there
is at present no formal obligation for Romania not
legislation containing such political
restrictions for aliens, it is evident that Romania as a candidate country should endeavour to ensure that
its legislation is gradually made compatible with that of the Community.

to adopt

The Honourable Member has also raised concern at two provisions in the draft legislation,
i.e. the
obligation for a person who receives a foreigner for more than five days to inform the authorities, and
the rule which makes the granting of a residence permit conditional upon the presentation of a medical
insurance. According to the Europe agreement the contracting parties have the right to apply national
legislation concerning such issues relating to the entry and stay of foreigners. However, after accession,
Romania will be obliged to participate in the Schengen co-operation and should therefore successively
make its future legislation, i.e. the obligation to inform the authorities on the entry of foreigners, in line
also with the Schengen agreement.

The Commission maintains a continuous dialogue with the Romanian authorities on approximation of its
legislation with a view to accession to the Community and will not fail to make the Romanian authorities
aware of the need to progressively align with the acquis the provisions to which the Honourable Member
has referred.

(1) COM(99) 510 final.
(2) OJ L 335, 28.12.1999.

(2000/C 280 E/090)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2630/99

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Granting of protected designation of origin to the traditional balsamic vinegars of Modena and

Reggio

The regulatory committee has refused to grant protected designation of origin to the traditional balsamic
vinegars of Reggio and Modena.

According to the farmers and producer(cid:146)s associations that have taken an interest in the matter, the
protection and exploitation of quality agricultural and food products are being undermined by exclusively
commercial
is why the committee has refused to grant protected
interests and this,
designation of origin to the above product.

in their view,

These vinegars, produced in the provinces of Modena and Reggio, in Emilia-Romagna, date back to the
Renaissance and the Middle Ages. The balsamic vinegar of Modena has been famous since 1508, and the
Reggio vinegar since the 12th century.

For centuries they have been aged for over twelve years in small barrels made of the finest wood. On the
European market and elsewhere producers of the traditional balsamic vinegars of Modena and Reggio have
to continually guard against imitations.

Italian government experts in agriculture and gastronomy unanimously believe that these vinegars are a
typical and unique product and should not be confused with mass-produced vinegars.

Given the above, does the Commission not consider that the traditional balsamic vinegars of Reggio and
Modena meet all the necessary requirements for being granted a protected designation of origin?