Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Council Directive laying down minimum standards on the reception of applicants for asylum in Member States"
Date: 2001-11-28
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU Member State, admission of aliens, political asylum, public awareness campaign, rights of aliens

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/63

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive laying
down minimum standards on the reception of applicants for asylum in Member States’

(2002/C 48/14)

On 6 June 2001 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 63 of
the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 November 2001. The rapporteur was
Mr Mengozzi and the co-rapporteur was Mr Pariza Castan˜ os.

At its 386th plenary session (meeting of 28 November 2001), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 115 votes to one, with three abstentions.

1.

Introduction

— the directive does not apply to EU citizens;

This proposal

is one of a series of draft directives
1.1.
— currently being examined by the Committee — designed to
set up a common European asylum system. It follows on from
paragraph 14 of the Tampere European Council conclusions,
implementing Article 63 of the EC Treaty.

1.2.

Its objectives are to:

— establish minimum standards for the reception of asylum

seekers;

— set out the various reception conditions for the various
stages or types of procedure or categories of person;

— improve the efficiency of national systems;

— limit secondary movements;

— unmarried couples are treated in the same way as married
couples only in those Member States that recognise such
equal treatment;

— no distinction is made however in the case of dependent

children;

— the directive does not apply to applications for asylum
made to the diplomatic representations of Member States;

— Member States may choose whether or not to apply the
directive to procedures governing forms of protection
that do not fall within the terms of the Geneva Conven-
tion.

The second chapter covers general provisions relating

2.3.
to asylum seekers’ entitlement to:

— secure comparable living conditions for asylum seekers

in all Member States.

— receive all the information they need;

As part of its preparations, the Commission consulted
the more relevant non-

1.3.
the UNHCR and a number of
governmental organisations.

— receive a document that certifies their status;

— move freely within all or part of the national territory;

2. Gist of the proposal

2.1.

The proposed directive has eight chapters.

— maintain their family unit;

— benefit from health and psychological care;

— receive education for minors;

The first chapter defines the scope of the directive and

2.2.
the meaning of the terms used. For instance:

— have access to the labour market and vocational training.

C 48/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

2.4.
The third and fourth chapters detail material reception
conditions, which must allow for an adequate standard of
living and protection of asylum seekers’ fundamental rights.
They therefore refer to housing and health and psychological
care.

the European Convention on Human Rights, the International
the
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination
against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the
Child.

The fifth chapter lists the cases in which reception
2.5.
conditions may be reduced or withdrawn following negative
behaviour, for instance if the applicant:

— disappears;

— withdraws the application;

— conceals financial resources;

— is regarded as a threat to national security;

— behaves violently.

2.6.
The sixth chapter details provisions for persons with
special needs, such as minors, disabled or elderly people,
pregnant women, victims of abuse or sexual discrimination,
victims of torture or violence, and single parents.

2.7.
The seventh and eighth chapters describe actions to
improve the efficiency of the reception system and final
provisions. These refer to cooperation and coordination
between Member States and with the Commission, the role of
local communities, and the system for guidance, monitoring
and control at national and Community level. Member States
are to transpose the directive by 31 December 2002.

3. General comments

3.1.
The Committee welcomes the draft directive’s objec-
tives and endorses its substance. It does however have a few
comments to make regarding its provisions, with the premise
that minimum standards must be based on best practice and
that a just and dignified reception system is the best foundation
for a successful integration process and, where appropriate, a
fair system for returning asylum seekers to their countries of
origin.

The Committee notes that

the subjects addressed
3.2.
— pursuant to the mandate conferred in paragraphs 13, 14
and 15 of the conclusions of the Tampere European Council
of 15 and 16 October 1999 — must be considered in the
context of fundamental human rights. These issues slot into
an international
in addition to the
Geneva Convention and the 1967 New York Protocol, includes

legal framework that,

3.3.
legal
Although it refers to numerous international
instruments that guarantee rights of various kinds, the draft
directive avoids using the word ‘rights’, replacing it with
various circumlocutions such as ‘freedom of ...’, ‘possibility of
...’, ‘access to ...’ or ‘may ...’. The only exception is the repeated
mention of the ‘right’ to bring proceedings before a court. This
paints a picture of an asylum seeker as someone basically
deprived of rights. The Committee is not convinced that
this image will dovetail easily with the above-mentioned
international legal context.

4. Specific comments

The Committee considers it self-evident

4.1.
the
measures provided for under this directive will also be applied
to procedures for examining applications for protection other
than that emanating from the Geneva Convention (Article 3).

that

4.1.1.
The Commission proposes in Article 2 that unmar-
ried partners in a stable relationship should be recognised only
if the legislation of the Member State where the application is
being examined treats unmarried couples in the same way as
married couples. This seems the only possible course of action,
as otherwise the result would be either discrimination or an
inappropriate harmonisation of national laws on this matter.

4.2.
The basic right to free movement (Article 7) is an
extremely delicate issue as it is difficult to balance it with the
need to process asylum applications rapidly. The Committee
appreciates the efforts made to limit the movement restrictions
to those necessary for the purposes of the directive and to
balance them with derogations and guarantees of recourse to
a judicial body. It cannot be denied, however, that this type of
restriction could reduce the effectiveness of other provisions,
such as access to the labour market. The Committee therefore
thinks that, except in the case of justified and time-limited
derogations dictated by administrative procedures, free move-
ment should be guaranteed throughout the national territory.

The possibility of access

4.3.
to the labour market
(Article 13) is clearly of material and moral benefit to both
asylum seeker and host country. The six-month period, after
which such access cannot be denied, seems fair, although the
negative wording suggests an unwillingness to concede

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/65

something which the Committee views as a right. For this
reason, the Committee is concerned by the generic nature of
the wording of Article 14 and the broad power left to the
Member States to establish procedures. It should at least be
specified that
this access covers both self-employed and
employed work and that, in the latter case, rights and salaries
must be equivalent
to those of Member State nationals.
Complicating or restricting access to work will only encourage
the spread of undeclared work.

Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
the
European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Reception conditions
must provide an adequate standard of living so as to protect
the health and well-being of the asylum seeker and dependent
family members, provide separate accommodation for men
and women while allowing families to stay together, provide
schooling for minors, assess the specific requirements of
elderly people, children and people with disabilities, and allow
people to practise their religions in suitable places and carry
out cultural activities with the same freedom as nationals (1).

4.3.1.
The proposal also sets a six-month threshold for
access to vocational training (Article 14). Such training is
essential in order to speed up integration. The Committee feels
that although this threshold is reasonable when dealing with
access to the labour market, it is not appropriate in the case of
vocational training. Training should be offered as widely as
possible for third-country nationals in the care of a Member
State. This is essential on two counts. Firstly, any training
which these people receive will benefit the development of
their country of origin if they return there: one most not
forget Community immigration policy’s commitment to joint
development and mobility to equip the countries of origin
with trained people. Secondly, if these people remain in a
Member State, the training they have received will make it
easier for them subsequently to find employment there.

4.3.2.
The same criteria — which the Committee considers
as reasons for granting vocational training to asylum seekers —
can also be extended to other fields of training, such as
language courses or study of the society and institutions of the
host country. The proposed directive should thus include a
paragraph on education stressing the Member State’s obli-
gation to provide educational assistance from the start of the
reception procedure.

On this note,

it should be mentioned that

4.3.3.
the
Community equal opportunities initiative (EQUAL) makes
explicit reference to asylum seekers in the context of active
and preventive employment policies, and anti-discrimination
and equal opportunities policies.

4.4.1.
The period spent in reception centres should be as
brief as possible — especially since reception centres often
resemble detention centres — before people are moved
to alternative, normal accommodation. However, it is very
important for residents to play some part in the running of
the centre during their time there and they must have the
possibility to refer to an independent authority for protection
against violation of their individual rights.

4.4.2.
The sum and type of allowances (monetary, in kind
or vouchers) is fundamental, as this determines the asylum
seekers’ standard of living and quality of life, which should
not differ too much from one Member State to another.
Nevertheless, the Committee is aware that such differences
exist, and are not always justified by differences in cost of
living or environmental conditions, and that the guidance,
monitoring and control system provided for under Article 30
does not seem to be enough to ensure that asylum seekers
benefit
from similar material reception conditions in all
Member States. A European monitoring system should be set
up,
involving the UNHCR, NGOs with expertise in the
area and, for work-related aspects, the social partners. The
Commission should be informed of survey findings every year.

It should also be specified that

4.4.2.1.
The Committee considers that it is not enough to
state that the total amount of the allowances must be sufficient
to prevent applicants and accompanying family members from
falling into poverty.
the
allowance is to be determined with reference to the basic old-
age pension or, where such a pension does not exist, the
payments provided by an institute which performs the same
function. At all events, the various forms of allowance granted
to asylum seekers should take account of the full range of
benefits available to Member State nationals.

4.4.
References to the definition of material reception
conditions (Articles 15-19) can be found in the International

(1) Article 4 of the Geneva Convention states that:

‘Religion: The
Contracting States shall accord to refugees within their territories
treatment at least as favourable as that accorded to their nationals
with respect to freedom to practise their religion and freedom as
regards the religious education of their children.’

C 48/66

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.2.2002

4.4.2.2.
The use of vouchers rather than monetary allow-
ances has been severely criticised in some countries both
because of the difficulties it causes asylum applicants and
because it distinguishes them from the rest of the population
unnecessarily. The Committee thinks that the proposed direc-
tive should not include provision for the use of vouchers.

4.5.
The Committee does not accept that the type of health
and psychological care (Articles 20-21) provided should differ
depending on the type of procedure adopted; basic health care
should be accessible to all.

4.6.
The conditions set out in Article 22 for the reduction
or reversal of reception conditions seem illogical and do not
respond to the directive’s objectives. For instance, if asylum
seekers:

4.8.
The actions to improve the efficiency of the reception
system (Articles 27-31), which are the responsibility of the
Member States, are especially important for the purposes of
achieving the directive’s objectives, for instance:

— the appointment of a national contact point for exchange

of information between Member States;

— regular communication to the Commission of infor-

mation relating to asylum seekers;

— coordination with the NGOs concerned, to enable them

to do their work as well as possible;

— the promotion, in conjunction with local authorities, of
initiatives to prevent racism, xenophobia and sexual
discrimination; religious discrimination should be added
to this list;

— monitoring of the standard of reception conditions;

— withdraw their applications, they no longer fall within

the scope of the directive;

— training for all staff who come into contact with asylum

seekers, covering the procedure from beginning to end.

— are considered to be a threat to national security or there
are reasons to believe that they have committed war
crimes or crimes against humanity,
they fall within
the responsibility of the judicial authority or have the
reception conditions withdrawn if it is not possible for
them to come under the jurisdiction of the host country;

— disappear for over 30 days or do not comply with the
obligation to remain within a specific area, the reasons
for that behaviour are to be assessed and, applying the
proportionality principle, a decision taken as to whether
the reception procedure should continue or be stopped;
in either case it seems inappropriate to reduce
but
reception conditions that the directive itself defines as
minimum.

4.6.1.
The only case in which reception conditions should
be reduced is when asylum seekers have concealed their own
financial resources, for the simple reason that they are able to
provide partially or fully for their own needs. Basic health care
should however be guaranteed in the interests of the host
country, and not only in emergencies.

4.7.
The Committee is satisfied with the section on pro-
visions for persons with special needs (Articles 23-26), and in
particular the attention given to the problems of children,
single women, victims of torture and violence, and persons
with disabilities.

The Committee feels that the main NGOs and the social
partners should be involved with the last three aspects in
particular.

5. Conclusions

The Committee stresses that despite laudable intentions
5.1.
to speed up reception procedures, the authorities in some
countries can take months (and, in many cases, well over a
year) to reach a decision. Ideally, the current overhaul of
immigration and asylum policy — which is being conducted
on the basis of the Tampere Council guidelines and with a
view to respect for fundamental human rights and a Union
that is open to the rest of the world — should reduce the
number of asylum applications. However, this process will
take time and will have to overcome some cultural resistance.

5.2.
It is not desirable that people fleeing from repression
and persecution — in the absence of evidence to the contrary
— should find their rights suspended for a lengthy period
from the moment they set foot in the host country.

The Committee therefore thinks that all the possibilities
5.3.
and concessions which the draft directive offers asylum
applicants should be explicitly turned into rights, specifying
any occasions and reasons whereby exceptions are deemed
necessary on administrative grounds. This would also give
practical effect to the only right that is recognised, namely the
right to access to justice.

21.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 48/67

5.4.
Finally, the Committee points out that a good reception
system does not depend solely on material conditions and
efficient organisation, but also on a positive attitude on the

part of the general public, who must be properly informed
and prepared to learn why people seek asylum,
thereby
fostering a climate of understanding.

Brussels, 28 November 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No. 577/98 on the organisation
of a labour force sample survey in the Community’

(2002/C 48/15)

On 2 July 2001 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262
of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 November 2001 by a unanimous vote. The
rapporteur working alone was Mr Sklavounos.

At its 386th plenary session of 28 and 29 November 2001 (meeting of 28 November 2001), the
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 117 votes to one with one abstention.

1.

Introduction

In the Commission report on the implementation of
1.3.
the regulation (1), adopted in January 2001, one conclusion
was that a continuous survey is carried out only in ten of the
EU Member States.

1.1.
Council Regulation (EC) No. 577/98, on the organis-
ation of a labour force sample survey in the Community, lays
down the basic provisions for a labour force sample survey,
designed to provide comparable statistical
information on
the level and pattern of and trends in employment and
unemployment in the Member States.

1.3.1.
Another conclusion was that, at the time the regu-
lation was adopted, the lack of an obligation on the part of
Member States to move to a continuous survey is being
exploited by those for whom this presents both a technical
and political problem. As long as a Member State, which
accounts for a sizeable proportion of EU employment, does
not move to a continuous survey, the efforts made by the
other Member States are unacceptably devalued in a European
perspective.

1.2.
Because of the difficulty in implementing a continuous
labour force survey on the same date in all Member States, the
Council Regulation (EC) No. 577/1998 provided in
Article 1(2), that ‘those Member States which are not in a
position to implement a continuous survey may carry out an
annual survey only, to take place in the spring’.

(1) Commission report to EP and Council on ‘Implementation on the
Council Regulation (EC) No. 577/98 of a labour force in the
Community’, COM(2000) 895 final.