WRITTEN QUESTION P-1828/00 by Gilles Savary (PSE) to the Commission. Social security ‐ coordination at European level.
Date: 2000-05-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, France, Spain, amendment of a law, drafting of EU law, home help, infringement of EU law, pension scheme

C 46 E/214

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.2.2001

In this connection the activities pursued by the Asturian Rural Accommodation Network may be
highlighted. This body operates in one of the most scenically attractive regions of the Community and
the direct technical assistance which it provides to new promoters of rural tourism in Asturias has led to
the creation of many direct jobs in the region and approximately half as many indirect jobs.

What Community aid has been provided for the development of the Asturian Rural Accommodation
Network and to what extent, and in what way, can the promoters of this type of rural tourism in Asturias
gain access to the Community aid available to the sector?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2001/C 46 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1828/00

by Gilles Savary (PSE) to the Commission

(31 May 2000)

Subject: Social security (cid:129) coordination at European level

Two European citizens who are resident in France and, pursuant to Community provisions on social
security, respectively in receipt of a Belgian pension from the Belgian Pensions Agency and a pension from
the Aquitaine Regional Health Insurance Fund (Caisse RØgionale d(cid:146)Assurance Maladie Aquitaine) on the
one hand and of a Spanish pension and a pension from the Aquitaine Regional Health Insurance Fund on
the other, had been initially informed that the Aquitaine Regional Health Insurance Fund would assume
the cost of a home help.

A ministerial circular of 22 April 1999 stated that the National Old Age Pension Fund (Caisse Nationale
d(cid:146)Assurance Vieillesse) was not liable to pay out unless the greater number of quarterly social security
contributions had been paid into the general scheme.

In view of this circular, the Aquitaine Regional Health Insurance Fund said that it would not bear the cost
of a home help for the two pensioners.

In the case of the two pensioners in question, the majority of quarterly contributions were made to the
Belgian and to the Spanish social security systems respectively, neither of which will bear such costs other
than for pensioners resident in their countries.

Is the circular of 22 April 1999 in keeping with current Community law provisions on social security and,
consequently, is the refusal to bear the cost referred to above legal in view of such provisions?

What rights do these two people have as regards home help and with regard to which national authorities?

Should it become apparent that there are no Community provisions to deal with such a situation and
identify which authority is responsible for the provision of such benefits, does the Commission intend to
complement Community legislation as soon as possible in order to guarantee a high level of old age
benefits to all Community citizens in such situations no matter where they have chosen to reside within
the European Union?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2000)

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that a similar question was posed to the
Court of Justice, which had to examine whether the benefits of the new (cid:145)long-term care insurance(cid:146) scheme,
introduced on 1 January 1995 by the German legislator, constitute sickness benefits within the meaning of

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/215

Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to
employed persons and their families moving within the Community (1). In its judgement of 5 March 1998
in case C-160/96 Molenaar (2), the Court analysed the different types of German long-term care insurance
benefits and stated that they could be classified as either benefits in kind or cash benefits from the health
insurance scheme within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71.

In the opinion of the Court (cid:145)the long-term care insurance benefits partly consist of bearing or reimbursing
the costs incurred by the state of dependence of the person concerned, particularly as regards medical
costs. Such benefits, which are intended to cover the cost of care provided to the insured person either at
home or in a special establishment, the cost of equipment and the work carried out, are defined as benefits
in kind which are covered within the meaning of the Regulation(cid:146) (point 32 of the judgement).

However, the Court considered that the care allowance, which is seen as (cid:145)financial support which enables
the overall improvement of the standard of living of the dependent person by reimbursing the extra costs
incurred by the state in which the dependent person is residing(cid:146), is classified as a (cid:145)cash benefit(cid:146) within the
meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (points 35 and 36 of the judgement).

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71, which coordinates but does not harmonise the different national social
security systems, lays down rules which aim to determine the legislation to be applied, particularly with
regard to sickness benefits, according to the category of persons (persons in employment, pensioners,
unemployed persons).

With this in mind, the Commission called on the national authorities to submit their legislation on home
help in order to enable it to examine whether this legislation applies to (cid:145)sickness benefits within the
meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71(cid:146) and, if appropriate, to take the necessary measures to ensure
conformity with Community law.

(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971 (last consolidated version: Regulation (EC) No 118/97 (cid:129) OJ L 28, 30.1.1997.
(2) ECR 1998. p. I-843.

(2001/C 46 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1903/00

by Marietta Giannakou-Koutsikou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: The Adnan Oktar case

Science Research Foundation (SRF) is a non-governmental organisation which was established under Laws
743 and 903 and has been active in Istanbul since 1990. Adnan Oktar is the Honorary President of the
SRF. With 90 other persons, he was arrested on 12 November 1999, and he is still in prison awaiting the
end of the trial. A big police operation was carried out at around 3 a.m. in 48 different houses, as a result
of which all these people were taken into custody,
including Mr Adnan Oktar. On the basis of our
information, there were several human rights violations during this police operation, as well as the use of
violence during the arrest and afterwards. The police allege that the NGO is a criminal organisation. In the
past, two other accusations had been made against Mr Adnan Oktar, but he had been cleared both times.
The trial of Mr Oktar is under way. During the first hearing on 7 April 2000, the public prosecutor called
for the detained SRF members to be released by the public prosecutor because not a single shred of
evidence was found. The second hearing will be on 2 June 2000.

Given that Turkey is an applicant country, I should like to know if the Commission is aware of this case
and, if it considers that this constitutes a human rights violation, what measures it intends taking to
prevent the recurrence of such events?