WRITTEN QUESTION P-3823/02 by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission. Freedom of movement for Palestinians within the EU.
Date: 2002-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU visa policy, Palestine, Schengen Agreement, admission of aliens, foreign national, free movement of persons, residence permit

C 268 E/50

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

Multiannual Financial Agreements between the Commission and the candidate countries are drawn up in
the language of the beneficiary country and English, the English version being the authentic text. These
agreements also provide for communication between the Commission and the beneficiary country relating
to them to be in English. The negotiation of the agreements took place mainly in English but whenever the
representatives of the country concerned so wished, in French and on occasion in German.

The Commission would like to emphasise that Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations provides that, as a
general condition of recruitment, a successful candidate must have ‘a thorough knowledge of one of the
languages of the Communities and a satisfactory knowledge of another language of the Communities to
the extent necessary for the performance of his duties.’

The Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that as part of its
internal training policy, it took a decision in 1991 that a ‘language profile’ should be drawn up for each
new official or member of the temporary staff with a view to encouraging that person to perfect his
knowledge of a second language or to acquire a third.

The Commission must also recall that it made an absolute priority of providing intensive language courses
for officials in order to fill the gaps and complete the language training of officials who did not necessarily
have the opportunity at the outset to learn the languages most frequently used for specific training courses
(other than language courses). Trainers are now making a great effort to use not only the official language
in which the specific training course is given but also the second language; better still, the trend is
increasingly towards bilingual courses (for example, in the field of management) where it has been noted
that trainers selected for their multi-cultural background are being employed more and more; a number of
specific training courses are given in three languages.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1 determining the languages to be used by the European Economic Community,

OJ B 17, 6.10.1958.

(2003/C 268 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3823/02

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(20 December 2002)

Subject: Freedom of movement for Palestinians within the EU

A constituent of mine raised the following concerns regarding the freedom of movement within Europe of
Palestinian refugees with European spouses. Although she has German citizenship, making travel plans for
her husband and herself to visit family in her homeland is continually frustrating and difficult.

Palestinian refugees who fled the Arab-Israeli conflict in what was previously Palestine to the refugee
camps of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egyptian-run Gaza and the Palestinian territory of the West Bank from
1948 onwards have since been refused the right of return by Israeli authorities. Unable to acquire the
nationality of a third state, refugees and their descendants have been forced to assume a ‘stateless’ status.
The freedom of movement of these refugees even those married to European citizens, is severely restricted
worldwide. Whilst it is possible for Palestinians with European spouses to be granted residence in some EU
states, travelling to other EU states remains complicated and restrictive. Travel documents issued to
Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, for example, are not recognised by most EU countries and are subject to
exceptional passport-recognition procedures for visa applications.

What plans does the Commission have to review residency and asylum policies in the EU and to consider
changes to grant Palestinians and other displaced or ‘stateless’ persons married to EU citizens greater
freedom of movement within the EU and the ability to apply for long-term visas?

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/51

Does it agree that the question of displaced persons, especially those married to EU citizens, needs to be
discussed more actively by the EU in the field of immigration and freedom of movement within Europe?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2003)

In the case described by the Honourable Member, two different fields of Community legislation apply each
with specific implications.

1.

Community Legislation in the area of free movement of Union citizens and members of their families

Article 18 of the EC Treaty lays down the principle of the right of citizens of the Union to move and reside
freely within the territory of the Member States. According to existing Community legislation, notably
Council Directives 68/360/EEC and Council Directive 73/148/EEC (1), this right also applies to members of
the family who accompany him or her and who do not have the nationality of a Member State, including
stateless persons.

The members of the family of an Union citizen who enjoy rights under Community law include the
spouse, children under the age of 21 or dependent and dependent ascendants.

Under Community law, Union citizens are entitled to enter and reside in another Member State for a
period of up to three months simply by presenting a valid passport or national identity card. If they intend
to remain for a period exceeding three months, a residence permit must be obtained. The members of
their families enjoy the same rights, and will be granted a residence document of the same validity of that
of the citizen on whom they depend (article 4 §4 of Directive 68/360/EEC and article 4 §3 of Directive 73/
148/EEC).

Members of the family of an Union citizen who are non-Union citizens may, however, be required to
obtain a visa to enter the territory of [another] Member State because of their nationality (2). In that case,
the Member State concerned shall grant the visa free of charge and with every facility (article 3 of
Directives 68/360/EEC and 73/148/EEC).

It should be noted that Community provisions related to members of the family of Union citizens only
apply in the case when the Union citizen on whom the third-country national depends has himself or
herself exercised his or her right to free movement.

2.

The Schengen ‘Acquis’ integrated in the Union framework

Third country nationals, residing in a Schengen State and holders of a residence permit issued by that
State, may travel within the Schengen area with this permit and a valid travel document for a duration of
up to three months, whether they are a family member of an Union citizen or not. For those third-country
nationals who are subject to a visa requirement, the residence permit serves the purpose of a visa and no
additional document is required.

In the case described by the Honourable Member, the British residence permit that one presumes is held
by the interested party is not equivalent to a visa for travel in the Schengen States because the United
Kingdom does not apply the relevant provisions of the Schengen ‘acquis’. Consequentially, a visa needs to
be obtained in order to enter and travel in the Schengen area.

A complication arises from the nature of the travel document of the interested party. Indeed, when the
travel document is not recognised by all Schengen States, which is the case here, the issued visa is
territorially limited to those countries that recognise the travel document. As a result, the interested party
cannot benefit from the uniform Schengen visa and might have to make several visa requests depending
on the countries of intended travel.

The Commission stresses that the recognition of travel documents is an issue of national competence. The
Commission is, therefore, not in a position to remedy the situation in which a person might have to make
several visa requests depending on the countries of intended travel.

C 268 E/52

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

However, the Commission would like to point out that the Community requirement that Member States
shall accord every facility to family members of Union citizens in obtaining a visa should allow the
interested party to obtain a visa with a long period of validity. This would at
least alleviate the
inconvenience of having to make a new visa request for every trip.

(1) Council Directive 68/360/EEC of 15 October 1968 on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence
within the Community for workers of Member States and their families, OJ L 257, 19.10.1968 and Council
Directive 73/148/EEC of 21 May 1973 on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the
Community for nationals of Member States with regard to establishment and the provision of services, OJ L 172,
28.6.1973.

(2) The list of third countries whose nationals must be in possession of a visa figure in the Council Regulation (EC)
No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001, OJ L 81, 21.3.2001. This Regulation is applied by all Member States, except the
United Kingdom and Ireland, who apply national legislation in this respect.

(2003/C 268 E/055)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3828/02

by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Dansk Retursystem A/S as a technical obstacle to trade

(9 January 2003)

Articles 1 and 7 of European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC (1) on packaging and packaging
waste state that obstacles to trade and distortion and restriction of competition in the Community must be
avoided, and that systems must be set up in such a way that imported goods have access to the market
under non-discriminatory conditions.

It is therefore surprising that such an obstacle to trade and discrimination against imported goods is
allowed to take place in Denmark, where Dansk Retursystem A/S is obstructing free competition.

One of the ways in which this takes place is by stipulating that imported products may not be placed on
the market until at
four weeks after they have been registered with Dansk Retursystem A/S
(§9, paragraph 3 of Order No 713 of 24 August 2002 concerning deposits on and collection of packaging
for beer and certain soft drinks).

least

importers are required to declare their forecast sales for the first

Furthermore,
two months after
registration or to declare actual sales on a weekly basis (§11, paragraph 2 of the above Order), which is
suspicious given that the 10 members of the Board of Dansk Retursystem A/S include two from Carlsberg
and two from Bryggerigruppen which have a combined share of the market in beer of some 90 %
(www.carlsberg.com/www.bryggerigruppen.dk). This system thus gives the two biggest companies on the
beer market free access to data concerning expected quantities of imports.

In addition, imported products must be individually labelled with various instructions concerning deposits
which,
increases
together with the administrative costs entailed by the numerous forms involved,
importers’ costs considerably.

The above provisions make it practically impossible to import foreign beer into the Danish market. Will
the Commission therefore say what steps it intends to take to put an end to this obstruction of trade and
discrimination?

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2003)

Directive 94/62/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 1994, on packaging and
packaging waste has two main objectives: to protect the environment and to protect the functioning of the