WRITTEN QUESTION E-3287/02 by Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Principle of non-discrimination and respect for different cultures and traditions.
Date: 2002-11-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, Portugal, Spain, civil register, civil status, complaint to the Commission, interpretation of the law, surname

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/51

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(23 December 2002)

1.
It is not the duty of the Commission to be aware of the precise statistics relating to offences
committed and crimes solved in the Member States, nor the decisions by national police forces not to
investigate offences notified to them. This follows from Article 33 (ex Article K.5) of the Treaty on
European Union which provides ‘This Title shall not affect the exercise of the responsibilities incumbent
upon Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal
security.’

Pursuant to Article 33 of the Treaty on the European Union, cited above, even allowing that these

2.
statistics are accurate, it is entirely a matter for the authorities in the Netherlands.

The Treaty on the European Union requires Member States to ‘respect fundamental rights’ (Article 6)
3.
and provides sanctions in the event that a Member State is found to be in breach of that obligation
(Article 7). The fact that no investigation has been requested in relation to the Netherlands suggests that
the Netherlands is not prima facie in breach of the obligation to respect fundamental rights.

This part of the question calls for conjecture since no such ‘European judicial stability pact’ exists.
4.
The Commission is being invited to criticise the judicial system of a Member State and this is not
appropriate. It is not the role of the Commission to intervene in such cases. The Hhonourable Member
should take the matter up directly with the appropriate Dutch authorities.

(2003/C 242 E/051)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3287/02

by Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 November 2002)

Subject: Principle of non-discrimination and respect for different cultures and traditions

A Portuguese citizen has complained that the law on registration of names currently in force in Spain (Law
40 of 5 November 1999) discriminates against the children of marriages between Spanish and Portuguese
people, since the names and order of names of the children are altered without the parents’ consent.

The problem arises when a child born of a Spanish mother or father is registered at a Spanish registry
office or consulate in order to obtain Spanish nationality. When registering the child both registry offices
and Spanish consulates alter children’s names (by changing the order of
the surnames) without
the parents’ will and without recognising identity cards, birth
authorisation, almost always against
certificates or any other Portuguese official document.

In view of the principles underpinning the European enterprise, namely a Europe where people have
freedom of movement and there is mutual recognition of educational qualifications and court judgments,
does this not constitute an infringement of a basic right, i.e. people’s right to choose what name to give
their children? Does it not constitute lack of respect for a person’s identity (name), culture and traditions (cid:1)
in this case a valued tradition which entails passing on the names of the father and grandfather?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2003)

The complaint from the Portuguese citizen to which the Honourable Member refers, and which calls the
current Registration of Names Act in Spain (Act No 40/1999 of 5 November 1999) into question, has
been received by the Commission direct. The complainant considers that Spanish legislation which
provides that parents may decide by mutual agreement the order in which their first family name shall be
transmitted to their child, discriminates against children of Portuguese citizens who also have Spanish
nationality, because, under current Spanish rules, when they are registered in Spain such children lose the
father’s last
family name, which is the one transmitted to children in Portugal. According to the
complainant, the legislation is prejudicial to such children because it entails changing their names and the
order of their names in Spanish registers, and ignores identity cards, birth certificates or any other
Portuguese official document.

C 242 E/52

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

The Court of Justice has been asked for a preliminary ruling by Belgium’s Council of State in a similar case.
The request relates to the interpretation of Articles 17 and 18 of the EC Treaty in a dispute between a
Spanish national and the Belgian authorities over Belgian legislation on the registration of children’s
names. The case concerns a Spanish male national who is married to a Belgian female national (both are
resident in Belgium) and their children, who have dual nationality and to whom the lex fori, i.e. Belgian
law, is being applied in accordance with the rules of private international law.

In its observations to the Court of Justice, the Commission has argued that the principles of Community
law on citizenship of the Union and the free movement of persons, which are enshrined in particular in
Articles 12 and 17 of the EC Treaty, should be interpreted as precluding legislation that prevents an
administrative authority, when faced with an application to change a family name in the case of minor
children residing in the Member State of that authority and having the nationality of that State through
their mother and the nationality of another Member State through their father, from applying the legal
rules of that other Member State concerning the attribution of the family name on the grounds that in the
host Member State children normally take their father’s family name, where the application of that other
Member State’s legal rules cannot reasonably be considered as conflicting with the public interest in the
host Member State.

The Commission considers that any decision on what action to take in this matter should wait until the
Court of Justice has made its position known.

(2003/C 242 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3332/02

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(26 November 2002)

Subject: Afghanistan

Would the Commission clarify how the proposal from Council to repatriate Afghan refugees currently
living in the EU would be funded? Is the Commission aware that there are concerns about legal and
humanitarian aspects of this proposal?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2003)

The Commission is strongly committed to the reconstruction and recovery of Afghanistan. Since
September 2001,
In 2002,
development assistance will be over EUR 205 million. In addition, the Commission will finance humani-
tarian support of about EUR 73 million.

it has been one of the largest contributors to the reconstruction effort.

The massive return of refugees is widely seen an indicator of the achievements of the leadership of the
Afghan Interim and Afghan Transitional Authority. Up to 2,5 million refugees are thought to have
returned from the region, including internally displaced persons returning to their place of origin. The
Commission is determined to support the sustainability of these returns both through its humanitarian aid,
and through its development assistance which is especially aimed at rural recovery, physical recon-
struction, human and social capital and finally, governance and security.

As requested by the European Council in Seville, the Council of Ministers adopted on 28 November 2002
a plan to support returns to Afghanistan. This plan seeks to establish methods to support those wishing to
return. Its principles are modelled on the existing tri-partite agreements brokered by United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and concluded between the Afghan authorities and the host-country
concerned.

The plan adopted by the Council sets up a division of labour between the Member States and the
Commission. All pre-departure and transport costs will be covered by the host countries while the
Commission will undertake certain co-ordination functions and will bear the cost of reintegration
measures. Earlier in 2002, the Commission earmarked EUR 3,6 million to support qualified Afghan
nationals’ return to positions in the Afghan administration and to the private sector. In addition, with