WRITTEN QUESTION E-3123/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Mutual recognition of registry office records and residence documents between the Member States in the interests of citizens moving within the Community.
Date: 2002-10-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European citizenship, Ireland, Netherlands, United Kingdom, administrative formalities, area of freedom, security and justice, citizen-authority relations, family migration, free movement of persons, population census, residence permit

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/95

that a sporting
With regard to Community competition rules,
organisation could commit an offence under Article 82 of the EC Treaty if it was in a dominant position
and used its regulatory power to exclude from the market, for no objective reason, economic operators
who met objective criteria.

the Commission would point out

(2003/C 192 E/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3123/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 October 2002)

Subject: Mutual recognition of registry office records and residence documents between the Member States

in the interests of citizens moving within the Community

1.
Is the Commission familiar with the experience, described below, of a Netherlands man who began a
relationship in Ireland with an Irish lady born in England and who later returned to the Netherlands with
his wife and child? The circumstances were as follows:

(a)

It was particularly easy for the man to settle in Ireland, where, despite that fact that (cid:1) contrary to
information given to him beforehand (cid:1) no police station was prepared to register the newcomer, it
nevertheless proved possible without official registration or a residence permit to apply for a tax
number, work, obtain insurance and take driving lessons;

(b) There was no problem registering the mother and daughter in the Netherlands, but registration of
their relationship as mother and daughter was refused because the English birth certificate (cid:1) both the
original document and a recently stamped and signed declaration (cid:1) was not recognised in the
Netherlands on the grounds that the United Kingdom had not signed an agreement;

(c) A declaration of guardianship by an Irish court together with a declaration by the Irish child benefit

agency were also not accepted as evidence of the mother-daughter relationship;

(d) The persons concerned were told to request a new copy with an apostil, i.e. an expensive, stamped
declaration by a court authenticating the signature of a minister, official or notary, although the
authorities in the Netherlands could not say where this could be obtained in the United Kingdom;

(e)

It was recorded on the extract from the population register issued to the wife that she did not hold a
valid residence permit and that, in the absence of such a permit, she was not allowed to take a driving
test.

2. Which other Member States require a birth certificate as a precondition for registration as a resident?

Are there other cases of EU Member States not recognising each other’s registry office documents
3.
and making it more difficult for residents and partners of different nationalities to live together? Has the
Commission’s approach to date been one of accepting such situations or has it taken action that has led to
changes?

4.
Does the Commission expect the accession of new Member States to the EU to lead to greater
confusion in relation to such matters and to more individuals being disadvantaged as a result of countries’
failure to recognise each other’s documents? What steps have been taken in preparing for accession to
prevent such problems from increasing?

5. What coordination measures are being taken in order to permanently eliminate this problem,
ensuring that documents recognised in a Member State remain valid in another Member State without any
need for separate bilateral agreements, except where it is shown by means of an established procedure, a
procedure which is the same for all, that such a document has been obtained wrongfully or with criminal
intent?

Answer by M. Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2002)

1.
Article 18 of the EC Treaty states that every citizen of the Union has the right to move and reside
freely within the territory of the Member States, subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the
Treaty and by the measures adopted to give it effect.

C 192 E/96

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

Under current Community law, citizens of the Union may enter another Member State and stay there
simply on presentation of a valid identity document (passport or identity card). If they intend to stay for
more than three months they are required to apply for a residence permit.

In order for them to obtain a residence permit, Member States may only require production of a valid
identity document (passport or identity card) and proof that they are engaged in an economic activity.
Anyone intending to reside in another Member State who is not engaged in an economic activity must
show that they have sickness insurance covering all risks in that Member State and sufficient resources so
as not to place a burden on its social welfare scheme. There is no provision under Community law for
presentation of a birth certificate in order to obtain a residence permit.

Children under the age of 21 or dependent children have the right to reside with a citizen of the Union
exercising his or her right of free movement. Such citizens have to present a document issued by their
Member State of origin or the Member State from which they are moving, proving that they are the
parent.

The mutual recognition of decisions regarding parental responsibility is the subject of a Commission
proposal for a regulation that is currently under discussion in the Council. Under the proposal, decisions
by a court in a Member State regarding guardianship of a child would be recognised in the other Member
States without any further special formalities.

2.
As regards the documents required by a Member State in order to record its own residents in the
population register, the Commission does not know what practices the Member States follow, since the
rules on entering their own nationals in the population register are a matter for each individual Member
State. As regards citizens of the Union, the Member States observe the rules stated above.

A Convention on the mutual recognition of documents issued by another Member State was agreed
3.
between the States that were then members of the Community on 25 May 1987. However, it never came
into force because it was not ratified by all the Member States.

On the other hand, fourteen of the fifteen Member States of the Union, including Ireland, the Netherlands
and the United Kingdom, are parties to the Convention adopted at the Hague Conference on Private
International Law on 5 October 1961, abolishing the requirement of
legalisation for foreign public
documents. The Convention provides for complex legalisation formalities in the contracting States to be
replaced by the mere addition of the apostille. In the United Kingdom these are issued by Her Majesty’s
Principal Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
London S.W. 1.

4.
Nine of the ten States due to join the Union in the near future are parties to the 1961 Hague
Convention. Their accession to the Union should not, therefore, pose any particular problem in terms of
recognition of public documents.

Given the relative simplicity of the formalities required in application of the Convention, there

5.
appears to be no need for particular measures in the immediate future.

(2003/C 192 E/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3141/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 November 2002)

Subject: EU Member States’ use of target figures for the admission, reception and deportation of asylum

seekers regardless of the reasons why individuals have fled their countries

1.
Is the Commission aware that, in 2001, 22 % of asylum seekers were turned away in the Netherlands
after an initial examination of their cases, that the rejection rate has risen to 64 % in 2002 and that the
minister with responsibility for immigration and integration in the outgoing Netherlands’ Government
takes the view that as many as 80 % of asylum seekers ought to be rejected after an initial screening?