Proposal for a Council Regulation on the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (Recast version)
Date: 2003-08-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, administration of the Institutions, amendment of a law, operation of the Institutions

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 5.8.2003
COM(2003) 483 final

2003/0185 (CNS)

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL,
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

on the Activities of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia,
together with proposals to recast Council Regulation (EC) 1035/97

Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION

on the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
(Recast version)

(presented by the Commission)

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL,
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

on the Activities of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia,
together with proposals to recast Council Regulation (EC) 1035/97

1.

INTRODUCTION

In June 1994, in response to rising concern about acts of racism in the European Union, the
European  Council  at  its  meeting  in  Corfu  called  for  the  establishment  of  a  Consultative
Commission  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia.  At  Cannes  in  June  1995,  Heads  of  State  and
Government called on the Consultative Commission to consider the feasibility of a European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. The Florence European Council of June 1996
approved the principle of establishing the Centre.

The  Council  adopted  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1035/971  establishing  a  European
Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia ('the Regulation') on 2 June 1997 on the basis
of a Commission proposal. The European Council agreed that the Centre should have its seat
in Vienna. It began its operations in 1998, with the appointment of the first members of staff
and  its  move  into  temporary  premises.  The  official  opening  of  the  Centre  took  place  on
7/8 April 2000 in Vienna.

Racism  and  xenophobia  are  wide  concepts,  ranging  from  small,  everyday  acts  of
discrimination, through the barriers which are inadvertently established at all levels by public
and  private  institutions,  to  acts  of  the  most  extreme  violence.  All  these  phenomena  are
unacceptable and  are incompatible with the Union's values based on fundamental rights and
freedoms and the rule of law. The Union's objective of creating an area of freedom, security
and justice will be incomplete as long as effective measures to prevent and combat racism and
xenophobia are not in place.

Racism  is  always  with  us,  though  there  are  also  peaks  and  troughs  in  racist  activity,  often
linked  to  particular  events  inside  or  outside  of  the  Union.  It  is  important  to  understand  the
links of cause and effect which lead to these changes in activity. It is, for example, clear that
during  the  Gulf  War  in  1991,  the  European  Union  saw  a  dramatic  increase  in  attacks  on
Muslims  and  people  of  Arab  origin.  More  recently,  some  Member  States  have  witnessed
violent anti-Semitism as a reaction to tensions in Israel and Palestine. In the current political
context of insecurity linked to the international terrorist threat, the Union must be constantly
alert to avoid a repetition of those excesses.

The  European  Monitoring  Centre  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia  is  an  important  instrument
available to help the EU institutions and the Member States to combat these phenomena. The
objective of collecting reliable and comparable data about racism and xenophobia is essential.
Whatever the policy field, reliable data are essential if policy-makers are going to be able to
target  their  measures  effectively.  In  the  field  of  combating  racism,  it  is  essential  to  have  a

1

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1035/97  of  2  June  1997  establishing  a  European  Monitoring  Centre  on
Racism and Xenophobia (OJ L 151, 10.6.1997, pp. 1-7)

2

                                                
clear picture of the effectiveness of policies and practices across the Union. We must be sure
that they are focused on protecting the victims and changing the behaviour of the perpetrators.

2.

CONTEXT

The Regulation requires the Commission (Article 16) to forward to the European Parliament,
the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the
Regions "a progress report on the Centre's  activities, together with proposals, if  appropriate,
to  modify  or  extend  its  tasks,  taking  into  account,  in  particular,  the  development  of
Community powers in the field of racism and xenophobia". The report is required during the
third year following the entry into force of the Regulation.

On 6 October 2000, the Commission forwarded a first report2 to the Community Institutions
(COM (2000) 625 final). The report concluded that, given that the Centre had not been able to
begin its activities in earnest until 1999 and that it was not fully staffed until 2000, it was too
early  for  a  comprehensive  assessment  of  the  progress  made  by  the  Centre.  It  therefore
presented  an interim report on the  activities  carried out  so  far,  and announced  that  it  would
organise an external evaluation of the Centre in order to provide an independent view of the
efficiency  of  the  Centre  in  relation  to  the  objectives  set  out  in  the  Regulation  and  the
efficiency  of  the  human  and  financial  resources  used  to  attain  those  objectives.  It  was  to
provide  an  assessment  of  the  organisational  structure  of  the  Centre,  including  the  extent  to
which it has met its objectives; the effectiveness of logistic, administrative and management
methods; progress in setting up and managing the information network RAXEN; the quality
and relevance of the activities and products of the Centre; and the follow-up of activities. It
was  also  to  establish  the  extent  to  which  user  needs  have  been  identified  and  met  and
highlight user satisfaction with the information products and services developed so far.

The external evaluation was completed in July 2002. The Commission distributed the report
to the European Parliament, Member States Governments, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions and published the results on the Europa server.
It has since received the views of members of the European Parliament, of Governments, of
the Management Board and staff of the Monitoring Centre and of civil society organisations.
Those  views  have  been  taken  into  account  in  this  progress  report  and  the  accompanying
proposals for changes to the Regulation.

3.

EXTERNAL EVALUATION

The external evaluation of the Monitoring Centre was carried out under contract by the Centre
for Strategy and Evaluation Services, an organisation based in the United Kingdom.  It takes
into account developments from the setting up phase until the end of 2001. The full report can
be consulted at

http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/fundamental_rights/pdf/origin/Monitoring
Centre_eval2002_en.pdf

2

The Committee of the Regions adopted its own report in response to the Commission’s interim findings
(Opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 14 November 2001 on the Report from the Commission
on the activities of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (COM(2000) 625 final)
-  CdR  67/2001  fin).  The  Commission  has  taken  account  of  the  views  and  opinions  expressed  in  that
report in this Communication.

3

                                                
The following Communication takes account of the findings of the external evaluation and of
the various stakeholders who have reacted to the evaluation. It constitutes the Commission's
considered view of the progress made by the Centre so far.

3.1.

The Monitoring Centre's Primary Objective

The  primary  objective  of  the  Monitoring  Centre,  as  set  out  in  Article  2  (1)  of  the  1997
Regulation, is to:

‘Provide  the  Community  and  its  Member  States  with  objective,  reliable  and
comparable  data  at  European  level  on  the  phenomena  of  racism,  xenophobia
and anti-Semitism in order to help them when they take measures or formulate
courses of action within their respective spheres of competence’.

Providing  objective,  reliable  and  comparable  data  on  racism  and  xenophobia  across  all  the
Member States of the European Union is a challenging task. The approaches to the collection
of data vary enormously, from sophisticated, official mechanisms in some Member States to
more  basic  approaches,  heavily  reliant  on  the  collection  of  data  by  non-governmental
organisations,  in  others. While the Centre  has clearly  made  significant  improvements  in  the
objectivity  and  reliability  of  its  data  over  recent  years,  it  is  clear  that  the  objective  of
comparability has not yet been achieved to any substantial degree.

The  Monitoring  Centre  relies  heavily  on  a  network  of  National  Focal  Points  established  in
each of the Member States (the 'RAXEN' network), which it has created by encouraging co-
operation between academic, non-governmental and (sometimes) governmental organisations
at national level.

The principal outputs of the Centre are its four annual reports3 and a series of smaller-scale
studies, including those on

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

anti-Islamic reactions after 11 September;

the situation of Islamic communities in five European cities;

racism, football and the Internet;

anti-racist legislation in the Member States; and

racism and cultural diversity in the mass media.

The Centre has also published the results of a Eurobarometer survey  of  public  opinion  with
regard to racism and xenophobia, following up the  Commission's own survey  carried out in
1997.

These  reports  and  studies,  among  others,  have  provided  a  considerable  amount  of
information. The quality of the data provided  so  far  has  been  improving,  but  has  not  so  far
allowed  genuine  comparisons  to  be  drawn  between  the  situations  in  the  different  Member
States nor an assessment of the effectiveness of the anti-racist policies pursued by individual
countries. Yet the production of comparative data and assessments is an essential step if the

3

Published  respectively  on  22  December  1999  (covering  1998);  22  November  2000  (covering  1999);
18 December 2001 (covering 2000); and 10 December 2002 (covering 2001).

4

                                                
Centre is to be able to make meaningful recommendations about policies and practices to the
EU Institutions and the Member States and if policymakers are to be able to draw conclusions
about  their  work  on  the  basis  of  the  experience  in  other  Member  States.  This  is  why  the
external evaluators conclude that, despite the fact that almost six years have passed since the
adoption  of  the  Regulation  establishing  the  Monitoring  Centre,  it  is  still  not  possible  to
measure  the  effect  or  impact  of  its  outputs.  A  number  of  factors  have  led  to  this  situation,
some of which are clearly outside the Centre's control.

In seeking to achieve its objectives, the Monitoring Centre cannot be held responsible for the
fact  that  there  has  historically  been  a  lack  of  common  definitions  across  Member  States
relating to racism and xenophobia. However, delays in the RAXEN network becoming fully
operational  have  meant  that  it  is  only  recently  that  action  is  being  taken  to  encourage  a
convergent  approach  to  data  definitions  and  data  collection  procedures.  The  Centre's
Secretariat has  commented  that  although  the  information  available  in  each  Member  State  is
extremely variable, with the 15 National Focal Points now in place they hope to see a rapid
increase  in  the  availability,  and  thus  dissemination,  of  comparable  information.  The  Centre
reports that it is increasing its efforts to persuade national authorities to  adopt  compatible if
not common systems for data collection, in particular by establishing working groups on long-
term  strategies  for  improving  data  collection  and  on  the  methodology  for  improving  the
comparability of data.

Experience  of  developing  comparable  datasets  in  other  fields  (e.g.  economic  data,
environmental  data)  suggests  that  it  is  essential  to  work  closely  with  national  governments,
including statistical offices, to achieve gradual convergence. The Commission's consultations
with Member States on this point have underlined that the principal value which can be added
by the Monitoring Centre at European level is in providing truly comparable data. This does
not  necessarily  entail  a  complete  harmonisation  of  approaches  to  data  collection,  but
ultimately  the  Monitoring  Centre’s  remit  is  unachievable  unless  national  authorities  adopt
compatible  if  not  common  classification  systems.  National  authorities  have  confirmed  their
willingness  to  play  a  more  active  role  in  this  regard  in  their  consultations  with  the
Commission.  The  proposals  for  the  modification  of  the  Regulation  establishing  the  Centre
reflect this point.

3.2.

Other Activities

Round Tables

The  Monitoring  Centre  is  required  by  the  Regulation  to  facilitate  and  encourage  the
organisation  of  regular  round  table  discussions  or  meetings  at  national  level.  However,  the
actual organisation of national Round Tables is the responsibility of Member States. This has
led  to  a  variable  response  across  the  Member  States:  some  have  held  several  events,  while
others  have  experienced  difficulties  in  holding  regular  meetings,  with  the  lack  of  adequate
funding cited as one example of the problems faced. Some have held only one meeting in the
period to the end of 2002. The Monitoring Centre provides guidelines and support, but is not
the prime organiser of national Round Tables.

The  purpose  of  the  national  Round  Tables  is  to  maintain  contact  with  civil  society
organisations in the Member States. They enable the Centre to take account of the points of
view of various actors – NGOs, researchers, Governments – and the information they provide.
In  practice,  the  meetings  have  not  been  effective  from  the  point  of  view  of  gathering  data,
though  they  have  provided  an  opportunity  for  civil  society  organisations  to  express  their
views on issues related to racism and xenophobia in general and for this reason the Secretariat

5

of the  Monitoring Centre  believes  that  they  are  useful  events.  In  their  consultation  with  the
Commission,  Member  States  suggested  that  the  responsibility  for  organising  such  events
should  clearly  remain  at  national  level,  with  the  Monitoring  Centre  free  to  participate  as
necessary  and  appropriate.  However,  they  believed  that  the  Centre  should  not  be  bound  to
promote the organisation of round tables and that other means of involving civil society in the
work  of  the  Centre  may  be  more  effective.  The  Commission  agrees  with  this  view  and
accordingly proposes an amendment to the Regulation.

The  evaluators  note  however  that  there  is  value  in  continuing  to  organise  European  Round
Tables, bringing together actors from the national level, as this activity brings a Community
dimension to the work. The Commission recalls in particular the three European round tables
on  anti-Semitism,  Islamophobia  and  intercultural  dialogue  organised  by  the  Centre  at  the
request of the Commission  in late  2002  and  early 2003  as  an  example of the value this can
bring. The amendment proposed by the Commission would allow the Centre to continue with
this approach.

Research and Analysis

The  Monitoring  Centre  has  until  recently  had  only  a  very  limited  internal  research  and
analysis  capability,  but  is  in  the  process  of  recruiting  additional  staff  to  strengthen  this
function. It is clear that, with the budget available to it, the Centre will not become a major
centre of original research in this field. It will rather need to concentrate on the analysis and
interpretation  of  external  research,  encouraging  relevant  research  to  be  carried  out  by
universities, research institutes and Governments where appropriate. The external evaluators
comment  that  it  is  important  that  the  Centre  should  only  take  undertake  additional  research
where there is a strategic fit with its overall objectives. The Commission strongly agrees with
this view and notes that the energies of the Centre should focus on core business priorities and
should not be dissipated by involvement in ancillary research projects.

Dissemination of Information and Data

The  Monitoring  Centre  has  developed  a  wide  range  of  publications,  from  regular  reports,
magazines and newsletters to the publication of specific studies as the need arises.  Many of
the publications are available on the Monitoring Centre's web site, which also provides other
information  about  its  activities,  role  and  remit.  However  the  Commission  is  concerned  that
there  has  been  no  clearly  defined  communication  strategy  and  that,  given  that  the  primary
objective of the Centre is to support the Community and the Member States when they take
measures,  many  of  the  communication  instruments  have  appeared  to  be  inappropriate  and
untargeted. The Commission supports the conclusion of the evaluators that the Centre should
adopt a clear communication strategy which should cover the relationship between all forms
of communication, including reports, newsletters and the web, with a key focus on the needs
of  the  target  groups  –  principally  policy-makers  in  the  Member  States  and  the  Community
Institutions. The Communication strategy should be used as a working tool in the design of all
activities, ensuring that from the start it is clear exactly how each product is going to be used
and  with  which  audience.  The  Commission  welcomes  the  fact  that  Centre  has  begun  work
along these lines.

Annual Reports

The Monitoring Centre has published annual reports for the years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001.
Inevitably,  the  coverage  of  the  reports  for  1998  and  1999,  and  in  particular  the  quality  and
comparability  of  data,  was  not  as  robust  as  would  be  wished.  The  reports  are  becoming

6

increasingly  focused  and  better  linked  to  EU  priorities  in  the  fields  of  employment,  social
inclusion  and  anti-discrimination.  This  trend  needs  to  continue.  The  Commission  proposes
that a clear link between the work of the Centre and wider EU priorities should be made in the
Regulation  to  ensure  that  it  adds  value  to  the  policy  development  process  at  European  and
national  levels.  In  this  way,  the  Commission  believes  that  the  Centre  will  have  a  greater
impact on current policy-making at the different levels.

3.3.

Resources Available to the Monitoring Centre

For the period from its commencement in 1998 to the end of 2002, the Monitoring Centre has
had an available budget of some €20,5 million in commitments. An additional amount of €1,5
million  was  available  in  1998  but  not  used.  For  the  years  1998  to  2000,  there  was  some
underspending  of  the  available  budget  mainly  due  to  the  Monitoring  Centre  not  becoming
fully operational as quickly as expected.

The budget in commitments for 2003 is € 6,5 million, of which € 3,3 million is for running
and personnel costs and € 3,2 million for operations. The evaluators do not comment on the
overall  level  of  resources  allocated  to  the  Centre,  but  note  that  a  higher  proportion  of
resources  (both  operational  and  staff  related)  should  be  devoted  to  the  work  linked  to  its
principal  objective  of  providing  objective,  reliable  and  comparable  data.  The  Centre  has
commented that following the appointment of National Focal Points in all 15 Member States,
the financial resources allocated to the RAXEN information gathering system represent 53%
of the operational budget. The Commission believes that the overall level of the EU subsidy is
generally sufficient for the activities of the Centre, though it will need to be increased to take
account of enlargement.

The  evaluators  conclude  that,  to  give  an  overall  assessment  of  the  value  of  the  Centre,  the
investment  made  by  the  Community  budget  needs  to  be  measured  against  the  impact  and
effect that the Centre has produced. However, as noted above, the difficulties surrounding the
comparability of data have so far limited its effectiveness for the Community and the Member
States  and  this  fact  prevents  the  evaluators  from  reaching  an  overall  conclusion.  In  this
context, they note that that the Centre cannot be said to have demonstrated value  for money
for the €13 million it had committed in the years 1998 to 2001. The evaluators note a change
in  priorities  which  may  mean  that  this  situation  will  change.  The  Commission  recommends
that the question of value for money should be reviewed again once these changes take effect.
This conclusion is covered in more detail below.

7

3.4.

Appropriateness of the Monitoring Centre’s Objectives

The Regulation establishing the Monitoring Centre was adopted before the entry into force of
the  Amsterdam  Treaty,  which  introduced  new  powers  for  the  Community  in  the  field  of
fighting discrimination and for both the European Union and the Community in establishing
an area of Freedom, Security and Justice4. Since the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty,
Directives5  have  been  adopted  to  give  effect  to  the  principle  of  non-discrimination,
modernising the approach to equality issues and promoting convergence between the Member
States. Action has also been taken under Title IV of the EC Treaty to promote the protection
and integration of immigrants and asylum seekers, notably in the field of family reunion6, and
proposals are currently before the Council to strengthen judicial co-operation in dealing with
racist and xenophobic crimes, based on Articles 29, 31 and 34 of the EU Treaty (see footnote
4), which update the Joint Action on Racism and Xenophobia adopted in 1996. Moreover, the
Community  has  made  a  commitment,  in  the  context  of  the  Lome  Conventions  and  the
Cotonou  Agreement  between  the  EU  and  the  African,  Caribbean  and  Pacific  States,  to
enhance  non-discrimination  in  economic,  social  and  cultural  life  and  to  develop  measures
against racism and xenophobia. The Monitoring Centre is on response to that commitment.

The evaluators recommend that the areas in which the Centre operates should be updated to
reflect  the  current  situation  in  terms  of  competence  in  order  to  cover  the  phenomenon  of
racism and xenophobia comprehensively. The Commission agrees with this approach and is
making proposals to this effect.

The  evaluators  also  conclude  that  there  is  currently  some  legal  uncertainty  surrounding  the
ability of the Centre to deal with situations that include issues such as racial violence, as this
is not specifically mentioned in the Regulation. In the light of its consultations, including with
the Member States, the Commission does not believe that it is necessary to clarify this point,
as  it  is  clear  that  racial  violence  and  hatred  are  part  of  the  phenomenon  of  racism  and

4

5

6

The Treaty of Amsterdam gave the Community new powers under the Treaty establishing the European
Community  and  in  particular  under  Article  13  to  combat  discrimination  inter  alia  on  the  grounds  of
racial or ethnic origin. It also introduced a new title IV to the Treaty which provides for the adoption of
measures  in  the  field  of  free  movement  of  persons,  immigration  and  asylum,  judicial  co-operation  in
civil matters and measures in the field of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters.
Furthermore, Article 29 of the Treaty establishing the European Union sets out, as a means to achieve
the  Union's  objective  of  providing  citizens  with  a  high  level  of  safety  within  an  area  of  freedom,
security  and  justice,  the  development  of  common  action  among  the  Member  States  in  the  fields  of
police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters and the prevention of racism and xenophobia. The
above  mentioned  objective  has  to  be  achieved  through  approximation,  where  necessary,  of  rules  on
criminal matters in the Member States and in accordance with article 31 e) TEU (ex article K3). This
article states that common action on judicial cooperation in criminal matters shall include progressively
adopting measures establishing minimum rules relating to the constituent elements of criminal acts and
to penalties, in particular in the field of organised crime.
At EU level the Council adopted on 15 July 1996 a Joint Action concerning action to combat racism
and xenophobia on the basis of article K3 of the Treaty on European Union (this instrument is cited in
the recitals of the Regulation).
On  28.11.2001,  the  Commission  adopted  a  proposal  for  a  draft  framework  decision  on  combating
racism and xenophobia, based on articles 29, 31 and 34 TEU.
Council  Directive  2000/43/EC  establishing  the  principle  of  equal  treatment  irrespective  of  racial  and
ethnic origin (OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22).
Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and
occupation (OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16).
See  especially  the  draft  directive  on  the  right  of  third  country  nationals  legally  established  in  a
European Union member state to family reunification, on which political agreement was reached in the
Council on 28 February 2003.

8

                                                
xenophobia,  as  referred  to  in  Article  2.2  of  the  Regulation.  The  Commission  believes
therefore that the fears of legal uncertainty are unfounded.

Geographical Coverage

The evaluators conclude that there is no need to amend the geographical scope of the Centre
to  include  comparisons  with  countries  outside  of  the  EU.  Preparations  for  enlargement  are
already underway (funded in 2003 by PHARE) with the establishment of an initial series of
contact  points  in  the  new  Member  States  which  will  become  members  of  the  RAXEN
network  following  accession.  The  Commission  agrees  with  this  view,  but  suggests  that  to
facilitate  future  accessions,  the  Management  Board  should  be  able  to  invite  independent
experts from candidate countries to its meetings (see below).

Changes to Scope of Monitoring Centre's Remit

The evaluators considered two possible changes to the remit of the Monitoring Centre, first to
encompass a greater campaigning or lobbying role and the second to extend its scope to cover
other forms of discrimination (such as those covered in Article 13 TEC) and/or human rights
more  generally.  The  Commission's  consultation  exercise  suggested  that  there  was  broad
agreement  with  the  evaluators'  conclusion  that  such  changes  were  neither  appropriate  nor
necessary. Most respondents  to  the  consultation  believed  that  the  Centre  should  continue  to
concentrate on racism and that an extension to other fields would be an unwelcome distraction
within the limits of the resources likely to be available to the Centre and that it would lead to
a  weakening  of  the  emphasis  on  racism.  The  Commission  agrees  with  this  conclusion  and
proposes  that  the  Centre  should  continue  to  focus  on  the  issue  of  racism  and  related
intolerance.

The Monitoring Centre’s Name

The  external  evaluation  reflects  concerns  expressed  about  the  fact  that  the  Monitoring
Centre’s name appears to have different shades of meaning in different Community languages
and  that  in  some  it  suggests  a  regulatory  or  ‘overseeing’  function.  The  Commission's
consultations suggest that there is no strong support, either from the Member States nor from
the Management Board, for changing the name. On the contrary, there are some concerns that
a  change  of  name  would  serve  to  weaken  the  Centre's  identity,  in  particular  if  it  sought  to
focus more on the promotion of diversity rather than monitoring racism.

3.5.

Organisational Efficiency

Management Structure

The  management  structure  of  the  Monitoring  Centre  is  set  out  in  the  1997  Regulation.  It
provides  for  a  Management  Board,  an  Executive  Board  and  a  Director.  The  Management
Board  consists  of  independent  members  appointed  by  each  Member  State,  by  the  European
Parliament and by the Council of Europe as well as a representative of the Commission. The
Executive  Board  comprises  the  Chair  of  the  Management  Board,  the  Vice-Chair  and  a
maximum of three other members of the Management Board, including the person appointed
by the Council of Europe and the Commission representative. Decisions of the Boards have to
be approved by a two-thirds majority of members.

There  is  an  overriding  need  for  a  Management  Board  in  the  Monitoring  Centre  to  provide
overall  policy  direction  within  the  framework  of  the  Council  Regulation  and  to  perform
certain  supervisory  functions  such  as  the  establishment  of  work  programmes  and  budgetary

9

control.  The  evaluators  conclude  that  it  is  difficult  for  a  single  group  to  cover  all  of  these
tasks. This situation is complicated  by  the  fact  that  the  Regulation  requires  members  of  the
Board  to  have  expertise  in  the  field  of  human  rights  and  analysis  of  racist,  xenophobic  and
anti-Semitic phenomena, rather than in the fields of organisational management, planning and
budgetary control. Moreover, the evaluators note that the board is already a large body (with
18 members) and that the enlargement of the EU will increase the size of the Board, to at least
28  persons  on  the  current  basis.  However,  they  conclude  also  that,  in  the  light  of  the
sensitivity of the subject matter, the management structures of the Centre should continue to
include  members  from  all  Member  States.  They  recommend  revising  the  functions  of  the
Management Board so that it operates in a supervisory  role,  meeting  once  a  year, with  key,
specific  functions.  Most  of  the  existing  management  and  technical  functions  would  then  be
devolved  to  smaller  and  more  efficient  bodies.  They  propose  strengthening  the  Executive
Board and creating a Scientific Committee, which together would have the  responsibility of
guiding  and  controlling  the  Director  and  her  staff.  The  evaluators  recommend  that  if  an
enhanced  Executive  Board  and  a  Scientific  Committee  were  to  be  set  up,  an  appropriate
payment should be made to those members not otherwise remunerated for their contribution
to the Centre. The Secretariat of the Centre sees merit in the overall approach recommended
by the evaluators.

The  evaluators  also  suggest  that  the  Management  Board  might,  in  its  new  guise,  consist  of
representatives of  Member  State  Governments  rather  than  independent  experts,  and  that  the
guarantee  of  independence  as  regards  the  overall  policy  direction  should  be  ensured  by  the
new Scientific Committee. The Commission's consultations suggest that there is wide support
for  the  evaluators'  conclusion  that  there  needs  to  be  much  closer  co-operation  between  the
Centre and the Member States' authorities, both in the data-gathering function and to ensure
that the information produced by the Centre is taken into account by the Member States when
they take measures to combat racism. However, the current Management Board of the Centre
believes that  the independence of members of the  Board is  essential  to  the  credibility  of  an
institution  which  gathers  information,  at  least  in  part,  about  the  impact  of  the  policies  and
practices of individual Member State Governments on levels of racism and xenophobia. They
note that other human rights bodies, such as those of the UN, are also made up of independent
experts.

Finally,  the  evaluators  note  that  the  decision-making  procedures  based  on  a  two-thirds
majority  in  the  Management  Board  are  unnecessarily  difficult  for  more  routine  decisions.
They  recommend  the  adoption  of  a  system  whereby  minor  decisions  of  the  Management
Board  or,  in  future,  the  Executive  Board  would  require  only  a  simple  majority.  Major
decisions,  such  as  approving  the  annual  budget,  work  programmes  and  the  annual  report,
would  continue  to  require  a  two-thirds  majority.  The  Commission  notes  that  such  a  voting
arrangement  would  potentially  facilitate  the  decision-making  process  and  has  recently  been
adopted  by  a  comparable  agency,  the  European  Monitoring  Centre  for  Drugs  and  Drug
Addiction, based in Lisbon.

The Commission agrees that the existing management structure foreseen by the Regulation is
not  adapted  to  many  of  the  decisions  with  which  it  is  currently  charged.  As  with  the
Consultative  Commission  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia  (the  so-called  Kahn  Commission)
which  preceded  the  Monitoring  Centre,  the  Management  Board  provides  a  wealth  of
knowledge and experience, drawn from many academic disciplines and areas of civil society,
about racism and xenophobia. The expertise of the members of the Board lies in the field of
racism, and their  contribution to  discussions  on  developments  in  the  Member  States,  on  the
substance  of  draft  reports  and  on  the  definition  of  priorities  and  approaches  has  been
extremely  valuable.  The  Board  has  also  been  involved  in  discussions  of  the  political

10

relationship  of  the  Centre  with  Governments  and  EU  institutions,  thus  trying  to  define  the
Centre's  identity  in  relation  to  other  bodies.  The  first  Management  Board  in  particular
(1998-2001) concentrated on these issues to a greater extent than its pure management tasks.

However, there is also evidence of some confusion about the overall role and responsibility of
the  Board,  partly  as  a  result  of  its  being  seen  by  some  as  a  continuation  of  the  Kahn
Commission.  Many  of  the  principal  responsibilities  of  the  Board  under  the  Council
Regulation are related to long term and strategic planning, organisational decisions within the
Centre,  budgetary  management  and  control,  and  human  resources  issues  (in  particular  the
appointment of the Director). Despite their responsibility for the oversight of these functions,
members of the Board are not required by the Regulation to have skills in these areas (though
some  do)  and  budgetary  and  management  problems  have  arisen.  The  comments  regularly
made by the Court of Auditors and the European Parliament on the discharge of the Centre's
budget are a cause for concern. The Commission believes that the current difficulties will be
exacerbated  by  enlargement  unless  measures  are  taken  now  to  modify  the  decision-making
structures and to clarify the responsibilities of the different actors.

The Commission broadly welcomes the proposals drawn by the evaluators to ensure that the
members of the Management Board have the skills, experience and opportunity to ensure the
smooth  management  of  the  Centre.  The  evaluators'  proposals  also  have  the  advantage  of
strengthening  the  links  between  the  Centre  and  the  policy-makers  in  Member  States,  in
particular  by  proposing  that  the  Board  should  consist  of  representatives  of  Member  State
Governments.  However,  the  Commission  also  sees  some  potential  disadvantages  in  the
structures the evaluators propose, particularly in terms of the perceived independence of the
Centre. The consultations held by the Commission have tended to confirm the Commission's
conclusions.

In its consultations, the Commission explored the possibilities for optimising the effectiveness
of  the  decision-making  structures  of  the  Centre  while  taking  account  of  three  essential
criteria:

–  First, that the Management and Executive Boards should retain the necessary expertise to

take decisions on the substance of racism and xenophobia in the EU;

–  Second, that the Boards should also have the expertise to take decisions on the budgetary,
financial and management questions with which any public sector organisation is faced;

–  Third, that the composition of the Boards should maximise the influence of the Centre with
policy-makers  in  the  Member  States,  while  retaining  their  ability  to  guarantee  its
independence.

The  Commission  therefore  considered  a  number  of  options,  ranging  from  maintaining  the
existing  arrangements7,  through  to  the  proposal  made  by  the  evaluators  based  on  national
Government  representatives, 
independent  experts  and
Government representatives, and,  finally,  a model based  on  drawing  on  the  expertise  of  the
heads of the specialised bodies in the Member States which are charged with independently
promoting racial equality and combating racial discrimination.

to  mixed  systems 

involving 

7

The  current  Management  Board  is  strongly  in  favour  of  maintaining  the  existing  structure,  though
reinforced  through  the  creation  of  particular  sub-committees  which  could  be  responsible  for  different
aspects of the work.

11

                                                
Taking account of all the views expressed in the consultations, the Commission believes that
the  proposal  made  by  the  evaluators  might  be  regarded  by  some  stakeholders  as  an
unacceptable  interference  in  the  independence  of  the  Monitoring  Centre.  A  mixed  system,
combining an independent expert and a Government representative from each Member State
would  be  likely  to  be  cumbersome  and  extremely  expensive.  A  continuation  of  the  current
arrangements, whereby the emphasis is placed on the expertise of the members in the field of
racism, would not solve the problems identified by the evaluators in relation to management
control. However, the suggestion that the Boards should draw on the expertise of the already
existing  specialised  bodies  (whether  those  formally  designated  by  the  Member  States  under
Council  Directive  2000/43/EC  or  other  public  bodies  with  equivalent  expertise)  attracted
broad support from stakeholders. The heads of these bodies (whether Chairpersons, Directors
or Ombudsmen)

–  necessarily  have  close  contacts  with  national,  regional  and  local  authorities  in  their

statutory roles within Member States;

–  have expertise in the field of  combating  racism and a good understanding of the national

context;

–  have expertise in the management of a publicly funded organisation; and

–  are required to be able to act independently from national governments.

The  Commission  believes  therefore  that  a  Management  Board  which  is  made  up  of  such
individuals  will  be  able  to  bring  to  the  Centre  the  necessary  skills  and  expertise  to  ensure
effective direction and control. It has therefore made a proposal to this effect.

Organisational Structure

The balance between administration and operational staff is broadly in line with the balance
of staff at other agencies.

The balance of staff between data collection, research and publications is under the control of
the Director of the Centre. The Monitoring Centre chose to build up its staff working on the
dissemination  of  information  and  the  establishment  of  the  profile  of  the  Centre  at  an  early
stage  rather  than  concentrate  on  its  data-gathering,  research  and  analysis  capability.  The
Commission believes that this decision delayed the benefits to be gained from the Centre and
that it had some effect on the quality of some of its early outputs. As noted earlier, the Centre
now  intends  to  recruit  further  researchers,  but  maintains  that  it  nevertheless  needs  a  strong
communication  policy  in  order  to  disseminate  the  available  information  and  to  provide
information  efficiently  to  the  Community,  its  Member  States,  other  organisations  and  the
media.  The  Member  States  have  commented  in  the  consultations  with  the  Commission  that
they  would  appreciate  a  greater  focus  on  contact  with  national  governments  and  policy
makers. The Commission agrees with the evaluators that  more  effort is required  to  improve
the quality (rather than the quantity) of data collection to enable the Centre to offer products
to the Community and the Member States which add value to the policy-making process. The
changes  proposed  in the structure of  the Management  Board will help  to  address  this  issue,
but  they  are  not  sufficient  on  their  own.  Closer  co-operation  with  national  authorities,
particularly national statistical offices, is also required.

12

Development and Monitoring of Work Programmes

The Monitoring Centre has prepared a work programme for each of its years of operation, and
this work programme has been approved by the Management Board, as required by the 1997
Regulation.  Work  programmes  have  been  prepared  on  an  annual  basis,  though  an  overall
strategy  paper  was  approved  by  the  Management  Board  in  June  2002.  The  evaluators  note
that the early work programmes did not clearly relate back to the Centre's objectives, making
it difficult to see how individual projects fitted within the overall strategy framework, but that
this problem has now been corrected. To look at the longer-term perspective of some of the
Monitoring  Centre’s  work  –  such  as  data  collection  –  the  evaluators  recommend  the
development of a three-year programme, accompanied by detailed annual programmes. This
would require the identification of strategic goals and  allow the Management and Executive
Boards to ensure that the Centre is following an agreed medium-term strategy.

The evaluators note that the Monitoring Centre has recently introduced a process for reporting
to the Executive and Management Boards on the progress achieved in implementing its work
programme. They conclude however that the reporting procedure could be developed further
by more formal control of individual projects. The Executive Board has recently agreed that
the  progress  reports  should  be  more  structured,  reflecting  the  structure  of  the  work
programme itself, which should as far as possible contain indicators of success in order to turn
the process into an effective management tool.

Finance and Administration

The  Monitoring  Centre  faced  considerable  challenges  in  dealing  with  the  financial  and
administrative responsibilities of establishing a Community agency. The reports of the Court
of  Auditors  emphasise  the  scale  of  the  difficulties  it  faced.  The  most  recent  report  of  the
Court,  covering  the  2001  budget,  continues  to  highlight  a  number  of  problems.  Although
overall  the  Court  obtained  reasonable  assurance  that  the  annual  accounts  for  2001  were
executed in a reliable manner, it raises a number of points of concern:

– 

– 

– 

Appropriations  carried over to 2002 (1,2  million  euro)  were  twice  that  of  the
previous year. The Monitoring Centre attributes this to the late approval of the
work programme by the Management Board and to the delays in implementing
the  RAXEN  network  of  national  experts.  The  Commission  has,  through  its
representative on the Management Board, expressed its concern about the size
of  carry-overs  in  previous  years.  Moreover,  the  delay  in  the  approval  of  the
work programme concerned only a few activities out of the overall programme.
The  Commission  welcomes  the  Centre's  decision  to  bring  forward  the
presentation  of  its  work  programmes,  ensuring  that  its  work  programme  for
2003 was approved by the Management Board in November 2002.

Over 40% of the payments  relating  to  operating  appropriations  were  made  in
the  last  three  months  of  2001,  pointing  to  "inadequate  monitoring"  of  the
projects  financed  during  the  previous  year.  The  Commission  is  concerned
about the past capacity of the Centre to ensure careful management of projects
and the associated cash flow.

The  nature  of  the  changes  made  to  the  various  contracts  between  the  Centre
and  the  National  Focal  Points  during  2001  violated  the  principle  of  the
specificity of commitments made from the Centre's budget.

13

– 

Retroactive  financing  was  granted  to  a  project  which  the  Centre  was  then
unable to provide details on.

The Commission welcomes that in its reply to the Court, the Monitoring Centre indicates that
it has addressed or intends to address a number of these points in order to improve the overall
management  and  execution  of  its  budget.  However,  the  Commission  remains  concerned  by
the level and nature of the Court's comments, and of other issues not included in the Court's
reports  but  highlighted  by  the  evaluators  (such  as  public  procurement  procedures  and
contracts), which suggests that improvements to the control of financial and budgetary aspects
are necessary. Although some of the points have already been addressed by changes made to
the  Regulation  to  bring  it  into  line  with  the  new  Financial  Regulation,  the  Commission
believes  that  further  measures  are  necessary  to  strengthen  the  Centre's  capacity  to  deal
effectively with these questions.

Recruitment and setting up the Centre

The  evaluators  note  that  the  Monitoring  Centre  found  the  initial  recruitment  procedures
cumbersome,  in  particular  for  the  first  additional  staff  members  after  the  Director.  They
recommend that, in setting up an agency, it may be appropriate for the Commission to second
staff for a period to provide assistance in following the correct procedures. The Commission
has taken note of this recommendation.

Relationship with European Commission and other European Institutions

The  Commission  has  one  representative  on  the  Management  and  Executive  Boards  of  the
Centre  (out  of  18  members)  and  has  attributed  overall  responsibility  for  relations  with  the
Monitoring Centre to the Directorate General for Employment and Social Affairs.

The Monitoring Centre’s relationships with other Directorates General have developed as the
responsibilities of the Community have developed, particularly with the entry into force of the
Treaty  of  Amsterdam.  The  Centre  deals  with  competences  under  the  responsibility  of  other
parts of the Commission, such as the DG for Justice and Home Affairs, the DG for Education
and Culture and the DG for Research. The Centre also liaises with Directorates General with
horizontal  policy  responsibilities  such  as  the  DGs  for  Enlargement,  External  Relations,
Administration and Personnel and the Budget.

The  broadening  of  the  range  of  DGs  which  have  a  policy  interest  in  the  work  of  the
Monitoring Centre has led the Commission to conclude that the way it is represented on the
Board of the Centre should be reviewed. A proposal to this effect is included in the proposal
to recast the Regulation establishing the Centre which accompanies this Communication.

The  Monitoring  Centre  has  also  established  increasingly  productive  relationships  with  the
European Parliament and the Council of Europe. The Committee of the Regions has likewise
taken an interest in the Monitoring Centre’s work, reflecting the importance of action by local
and regional authorities in combating racism and racial discrimination. The Commission very
much  welcomes  the  Committee's  interest  in  the  work  of  the  Centre  and  its  involvement  in
specific aspects of its work (such as the study and conferences on the integration of  Islamic
communities in certain cities). This practical involvement could usefully be enhanced.

14

3.6.

Overall conclusions of the external evaluation

The  framework  used  for  the  evaluation  of  the  Monitoring  Centre  was  based  on  five  key
issues:  relevance,  efficiency,  effectiveness,  utility  and  sustainability.  The  evaluators
summarise their overall conclusions under these headings as follows.

Relevance:  Are  the  working  programme  activities  undertaken  by  the  Monitoring  Centre
appropriate given its remit, wider policy objectives and the problems associated with racism
and xenophobia in Europe?

Overall, the scope  of work set out in  the Monitoring Centre’s objectives seems appropriate.
The  evaluators  recommend,  however,  that  the  work  programme  concentrates  more  on  the
primary objective of data  collection and analysis  and  have suggested  other areas  where less
emphasis  should  be  placed.  They  note  that  the  Monitoring  Centre  will  only  succeed  in
achieving  its  primary  objective  with  the  co-operation  of  a  number  of  partners  including
Member State governments, NGOs and others.

Efficiency:  how  well  does  the  Monitoring  Centre  function  as  an  organisation  and  to  what
extent do its outputs represent good value for money from the funding provided?

The evaluators suggest that the Centre is taking steps to ensure it is well run. They conclude
that  the  various  management  arrangements  they  examined  –  financial  control,  business
planning, personnel management, etc - appeared to be appropriate or to be in the process of
being  revised.  They  note  however  that  changes  may  be  necessary  to  the  Board  structure  to
bring about more effective decision-making – particularly in the light of EU enlargement (see
above).

The evaluators found the wider question of value  for money difficult to assess at this stage,
because the Monitoring Centre had not  yet produced major outputs in respect of its primary
role  to  achieve  comparable  data.  On  this  basis,  they  conclude  that,  given  the  delays  in
establishing the Monitoring Centre and the relatively modest amounts allocated to its primary
role in the first three years, the Centre cannot be said to have demonstrated value for money
for the €13 million it had committed until the end of 2001. They noted, however, evidence of
a  change  in  priorities  in  2001  which  may  mean  that  the  Monitoring  Centre  will  begin  to
deliver outputs that reflect the substantial funding it has and continues to receive.

Effectiveness:  to  what  extent  does  the  Monitoring  Centre  achieve  its  specific  and  general
objectives  and  contribute  towards  the  achievement  of  wider  EU  and  national  policy  goals
relating  to  combating  of  racism  and  xenophobia?  What  is  the  added  value  of  the  EU  level
approach as opposed to separate actions taken at a national level?

The  evaluators  conclude  that  it  is  too  early  to  say  if  the  Monitoring  Centre  is  effective  in
achieving its general objectives. The main outputs of the Centre are still being worked on and
the  effectiveness  of  the  provision  of  comparable  information  cannot  be  measured  until  it  is
provided. However, the evaluators note that it is important that the Centre bears in mind the
need  to  provide  added  value  at  a  Community  level  –  it  should  not  just  carry  out  functions
which  could  be  carried  out  by  a  Member  State.  Thus,  the  provision  of  Member  State  data
which  is  not  comparable  is  not  enough  –  the  Community  value  added  lies  in  providing
comparability,  so  that  conclusions  can  be  drawn  between  the  effectiveness  of  different
policies and practices in combating racism. A similar point can be made for other Monitoring
Centre  activities.  This  was  a  point  which  was  strongly  supported  by  Member  States
authorities in the consultations carried out by the Commission.

15

Utility: to what extent do the Monitoring Centre’s outputs meet the needs of its target groups?

The evaluators  note  that  the  Monitoring  Centre’s  objectives  are  considered  important  by  its
target groups but that further attention needs to be given to how the outputs meet the needs of
stakeholders.

Sustainability: to what extent are the Monitoring Centre’s activities likely to be sustainable in
the longer term? Are the Centre’s activities having a lasting effect in terms of contributing to
increased awareness and understanding of racism and xenophobia in Europe?

Again, the evaluators conclude that it is too early to say whether the Centre has yet achieved
much  in  this  area,  because  of  the  lack  of  a  track  record  in  producing  final  outputs.  The
Commission's own consultations with the Member States suggest that the Centre has still to
establish a solid profile in the field.

4.

THE COMMISSION'S CONCLUSIONS

The Commission believes that the external evaluation has produced a valuable review of the
performance of the Monitoring Centre and that it has, in particular, highlighted a number of
points which need to be addressed. Its conclusion that the Centre has not demonstrated value
for money for the €13 million it committed up to the end of 2001 is particularly disturbing.
However, as the period covered by the evaluation ended in December 2001, the Secretariat of
the Centre has already had the opportunity to comment on each of the recommendations made
by the evaluators and it has already addressed, or begun to address a number of the questions
which fall within its own responsibilities. Where  appropriate the  response of the  Centre has
been presented under the various points covered above.

In  addition,  the  Management  Board  of  the  Centre  has  transmitted  its  own  views  to  the
Commission  as  part  of  the  consultation  process  following  the  completion  of  the  evaluation.
The  Management  Board  concentrated  on  the  aspects  related  to  the  structure  of  the
Management  Board  itself.  It  concluded  that  the  Board  should  remain  composed  of  one
member per Member State, that it should continue to be composed of independent experts and
that,  to  aid  the  efficiency  of  decision-making,  it  could  establish  separate  sub-groups  which
would  be  responsible  for  preparing  decisions  in  particular  areas  (e.g.  work  programme,
studies and publications, financial and management issues). The Commission has taken note
of these proposals and has also taken account of the views of civil society organisations active
in the field of fighting racism.

The Commission concludes that the overall picture of the performance of the Centre is mixed.
The  Centre  has  made  considerable  progress  in  establishing  from  scratch  an  organisation
which has the facilities and human resources it needs to perform its work. It has established a
network of information providers in all Member States which tries to strike a balance between
independence  and  objectivity.  It  has  developed  links  to  other  organisations  in  the  field
(Council of Europe, OSCE) which are beginning to bear fruit. But it is clear that, in terms of
its  outputs  so  far,  improvements  in  quality  and  value  are  still  possible  and  necessary,
particularly as regards the objectivity and comparability of data.

There  is  a  strong  political  commitment  across  the  European  Union  to  combat  racism  and
xenophobia and to improve the effectiveness of current policies and practices. To succeed, the
efforts  of  the  Union  and  the  Member  States,  and  the  results  of  those  efforts,  need  to  be
monitored and analysed. Monitoring racism in the European Union is an extremely complex

16

issue,  surrounded  by  social,  cultural  and  political  sensitivities  which  make  it  extremely
difficult for a new Agency to become immediately effective. But it is essential that the Centre
meets this challenge and the Commission is committed to supporting the Centre in its efforts.
After nearly five years of operation, the Centre needs to improve its effectiveness. It is taking
steps to tighten its management and strengthen its strategic direction in co-operation with the
Management Board. The Commission believes that the Centre needs to concentrate on its role
as the data collection body foreseen by the Regulation, and that it should give less weight to
establishing a profile as a campaigning organisation, which has caused some confusion as to
its objectives. In this context, the Management Board has requested, in its consultations with
the Commission, that the objectives and task of the Centre should be clarified and presented
in a more logical fashion. The Commission has accepted this request and has made proposals
accordingly.

The success of the Centre in working towards comparability depends on strong co-operation
with the authorities of the Member States. This is a point recognised by all stakeholders in the
Commission's consultations. The Commission proposes, therefore, to use this opportunity to
sharpen  the  focus  of  the  Regulation  on  co-operation  between  the  Centre  and  national
authorities to ensure that maximum value is obtained from the Union's investment. Fighting
racism is a shared responsibility and it is right that the Regulation should reflect that fact.

To ensure added value at a European level, the Centre needs to align its priorities with those
of  the  Member  States  and  the  EU  institutions.  The  Commission  very  much  welcomes  the
emphasis given by the Centre in its Annual Report for 2001 (published in December 2002) to
problems of racial  discrimination  in  employment,  which  fits  well  with  ongoing  work  in  the
context  of  the  Employment  Strategy.  The  Commission  calls  on  the  Centre  to  continue  and
deepen this work and to broaden it to other areas, in particular those dealt with by the Social
Inclusion  Strategy.  In  both  these  areas,  overall  EU  objectives  are  agreed  between  the
Commission  and  the  Council,  reflecting  a  common  understanding  of  the  priority  areas  for
action.  The  Commission  proposes  that  the  Regulation  should  better  reflect  the  need  for  the
Monitoring Centre to focus on these priorities.

Finally, parts of the original Regulation are no longer relevant to the day to day work of the
Centre as they apply solely to the setting up phase. The Commission therefore proposes that
the  Regulation  should  be  recast  to  remove  those  parts  which  are  irrelevant  and  to  amend
others in the light of the experience of how the Centre has operated so far. The Explanatory
Memorandum  accompanying  the  proposal  to  recast  the  Regulation  provides  details  of  the
Commission's thinking on each of the changes proposed.

17

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1.

INTRODUCTION

The  European  Monitoring  Centre  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia  has  been  in  existence  since
1998. Article 16 of Council Regulation EC No 1035/97 establishing the Centre instructs the
Commission  to  forward  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  EUROPEAN
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL Committee and the Committee of the Regions a progress report
on  the  Centre’s  activities,  together  with  proposals,  if  appropriate,  to  modify  or  extend  its
tasks, taking into account, in particular, the development of Community powers in the field of
racism  and  xenophobia.  The  Commission’s  Communication  on  the  Centre's  progress
accompanying these proposals serves the first purpose. The following proposals for recasting
Regulation No 1035/97 take up the Council’s invitation to amend or modify the tasks of the
Centre.

2.

JUSTIFICATION OF THE COMMISSION'S PROPOSALS

As  noted  in  the  Communication  accompanying  these  proposals,  the  Commission  has
consulted  a  range  of  stakeholders,  notably  the  existing  Management  Board  and  staff  of  the
Centre,  the  Member  States,  members  of  the  European  Parliament  and  civil  society
organisations.  The  consultation  focused  in  particular  on  the  findings  and  recommendations
made  in  the  report  of  the  external  evaluators  (see  the  Commission’s  Communication  for
further details) and on a range of ideas concerning the options for improving the governance
of the Centre, a point to which the evaluators drew particular attention.

The  Commission’s  proposals  are  intended  to  sharpen  the  focus  of  the  Centre’s  work  and
means  of  operation,  without  amounting  to  radical  reform  or  introducing  change  for  its  own
sake. It is important that the changes should take account of the experience of the Centre so
far,  building  as  far  as  possible  on  what  has  been  shown  to  work  effectively  and  correcting
deficiencies  where  necessary.  The  proposals  are  therefore  limited  to  those  which  are
necessary to ensure  the Centre’s sustainability and, in particular, its proper  functioning.  For
that reason, the Commission has not put forward any of the more radical proposals supported
by some stakeholders during its consultation exercise, such as transforming the Centre into a
wider human rights agency or making it responsible for  all forms of discrimination covered
by  Article  13  of  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community  (or  the  longer  list  of
grounds  found  in  Article  21  of  the  European  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights).  Nor  has  it
followed the proposal put forward by some stakeholders to bring the data-collection function
back  into  the  Commission  and  to  discontinue  the  Community  subsidy  to  the  Monitoring
Centre.

The amendments proposed fall into the following categories:

– 

– 

Those  intended  to  support  the  Centre’s  objective  of  helping  the  Community
and the Member States when they take measures against the various aspects of
racism and xenophobia, in particular by promoting closer co-operation;

Those intended to strengthen the Centre’s focus on the collection of data and in
particular  to  underline  the  importance  of  working  towards  comparability
between the Member States, where the greatest added value of the Centre lies;

18

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Those intended to adapt the governance of the Centre to the demands placed on
it, including in the light of the enlargement of the Union;

Those intended  to  provide  greater  clarity  over  the  Centre’s  objectives,  with  a
more logical presentation of the tasks designed to meet them, while leaving the
Centre greater flexibility in how it organises its activities;

Those  intended  to  adapt  the  fields  within  which  the  Centre  operates  to  the
developments in competence of the Community following the entry into force
of  the  Amsterdam  Treaty,  including  action  taken  in  the  field  of  racism  under
Article 13 TEC;

Those which codify the amendments to the Regulation already adopted by the
Council in the light of the entry into force of the new Financial Regulation8;

Those  intended  to  resolve  a  limited  number  of  legal  and  other  uncertainties
which have arisen during the application of the original Regulation.

The changes proposed will have no impact on the overall budget of the Centre, though they
may  require  a  review  of  the  allocation  of  financial  and  human  resources  between  different
activities,  with  a  greater  emphasis,  for  example,  on  data  collection  activities  and  on  co-
operation  with  the  Member  States  and  the  Community  Institutions.  This  coincides  entirely
with the findings and recommendations of the external evaluators.

To meet the objectives of the changes highlighted above, the Commission is proposing a large
number  of  small  but  important  amendments.  A  relatively  large  proportion  of  the  articles  is
therefore affected. In the light of this, the Commission proposes that the Regulation should be
recast rather than simply modified, thus making it possible for the users of the Regulation to
have  access  to  a  consolidated  text,  bringing  together  the  original  version  with  the
modifications already adopted by the Council Regulation of 18 June 2003 and those proposed
specifically  in  this  context.  The  presentation  of  the  text  therefore  follows  the  guidelines  set
out in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the
recasting technique for legal acts9.

3.

SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY

The objective of the Monitoring Centre is to support the Community and the Member States
when  they  take  measures  or  formulate  courses  of  action  within  their  respective  spheres  of
competence. The role of the Centre is to collect and analyse data and to present its findings in
a  way  which  is  most  helpful  to  the  EU  Institutions  and  to  the  Member  States  in  achieving
their objectives. It is independent in providing its advice, but it is not designed to act in the
place of the responsible actors to combat racism and xenophobia. By acting at European level,
it  is  designed  to  provide  information  and  analysis  which  enable  an  assessment  of  the
effectiveness of policies within and between Member States and so to add value in terms of
the design and targeting of policies.

In  this  way,  the  Monitoring  Centre  conforms  to  the  principles  of  subsidiarity  and
proportionality. The proposals for modification to the Regulation reinforce these elements by

8

9

Council Regulation (EC) No XXXX/03, (not yet published in OJ)
OJ C 77, 28. 03. 2002 p.1

19

                                                
highlighting  the  need  to  work  closely  with  the  Member  States  and  the  Commission  and  to
take  account  of  the  priorities  fixed  at  EU  level  in  the  definition  of  the  Centre's  work
programmes.

4.

LEGAL BASE

Articles  284  and  308  of  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community  (in  their  former
numbering of 213 and 235) provided the legal base for the existing Regulation.

The  Commission  believes  that  Article  13  TEC,  which  provides  powers  to  take  appropriate
action to combat discrimination based on, among other things, racial  and ethnic origin, now
gives  the  legal  basis  for  covering  important  aspects  of  the  phenomenon  of  racism  and
xenophobia.  However  it  is  not  sufficient  on  its  own  to  deal  with  all  aspects  of  racism,
xenophobia  and  related  intolerance,  notably  those  which  go  beyond.  Therefore,  the
Commission believes that, in order to ensure a comprehensive approach by the Centre, Article
308  TEC  should  be  used  in  conjunction  with  Article  13  TEC  as  the  legal  base  for  the
proposal. The reference to Article 13 has no impact on the decision-making procedure as the
proposal cannot be regarded as an "incentive measure" under Article 13 paragraph 2.

Article 284 TEC was not proposed by the Commission as part of the legal base for its original
proposal,  but  was  added  by  the  Council  during  negotiations.  Article  284  provides  that  the
Commission  may,  within  the  limits  and  the  under  conditions  laid  down  by  the  Council  in
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Treaty,  collect  any  information  and  carry  out  any
checks  required  for  the  performance  of  the  tasks  entrusted  to  it.  The  Commission  accepted
this addition by the Council. The Commission can therefore accept that this article should also
be used for the recast Regulation, in conjunction with Articles 13 and 308.

5.

EXPLANATION  OF  THE  DIFFERENT  ARTICLES  OF  THE  PROPOSED  RECAST
REGULATION

This  proposal  maintains  the  overall  structure  of  the  existing  Regulation.  The  following
commentary presents those articles which the Commission proposes should be modified. The
recitals have been modified where necessary in accordance with the changes proposed to the
body  of  the  Regulation.  The  recitals  have  also  been  reviewed  to  bring  them  closer  to  the
purpose of setting out concise reasons for the chief provisions of the enacting terms. This has
led to the deletion of a number of purely declaratory recitals found in the original Regulation.

Article 2

Article  2  has  been  split  to  separate  the  tasks  of  the  Centre  (now  in  Article  3)  from  the
objectives, in order to provide a clearer presentation. Small textual changes are also proposed,
which are intended to clarify that:

– 

– 

The primary recipients of the information collected by the Centre should be the
relevant institutions and authorities of the Community and the Member States
responsible for combating racism and xenophobia; and that

The scope of the  phenomena of racism and xenophobia should  be interpreted
broadly  to  encompass  related  intolerance.  This  change  of  terminology
recognises  the  increasing  importance  of  phenomena  such  as  Islamophobia,
particularly since 11 September 2001  and the current political situation in the

20

Middle  East,  and  mirrors  the  responsibilities  of  the  Council  of  Europe  (and
notably its European Commission on Racism and Intolerance), thus promoting
greater synergies.

Article 3

This Article now contains the principal tasks of the Centre. It makes clear that the tasks are
intended to serve the objective defined in Article 2 and that the Centre’s main activity is the
collection  of  information.  In  addition, the  Article changes  the order  of  the original lists  and
now separates the tasks into three distinct groups of activities:

– 

– 

– 

collecting and studying data (paragraphs (a) to (d));

securing the contribution of civil society in all its forms (paragraph (e));

using  the  information  to  support  the  Community  and  the  Member  States
(paragraphs (f) and (g)) and the wider public (paragraph (h)).

The following changes are proposed:

– 

– 

– 

– 

Paragraph  (a):  the  external  evaluators  and  the  Member  States  recognise  that
while the comparability of data remains the most important factor for the added
value  of  the  Centre,  it  has  not  so  far  proved  possible  to  provide  truly
comparable data. To do so will require strong co-operation between the Centre
and the authorities of the Member States, in particular the National Statistical
Offices. The proposed  change underlines  the  importance of efforts to  achieve
comparability  and  of  co-operation  with  the  Commission  and  the  Member
States.

Paragraphs (b) and (i): the proposed  amendments underline the importance of
Raxen  as  the  primary  data  collection  instrument  of  the  Centre,  anchoring  the
network in the Member States. The amendments also take over elements from
the previous Article 4, most of which is now redundant and which is therefore
proposed for deletion.

Paragraph  (d): the changes to this  paragraph recognise that the Centre cannot
and should not carry out all the necessary studies on its own, but should rather
co-operate with other bodies and organisations to encourage the carrying out of
research  studies  which  will  be  of  a  general  European  interest  in  the  field  of
racism and xenophobia. The amendment also takes account of the fact that the
Centre  has  in  the  past  accepted  requests  for  work  from  EU  institutions  and
others which have not fitted well with its overall work programme and which
have therefore deflected it from its primary objective. The amendment requires
the  Centre  to  accept  such  requests  only  where  they  are  compatible  with  the
work programme agreed by the Executive and Management Boards.

Paragraph  (e):  the  existing  Regulation  requires  the  Centre  to  “facilitate  and
encourage the organization of regular round tables” within the Member States.
The external evaluators question the added value of this activity, noting that it
requires  considerable  investment  by  the  Centre  in  terms  of  human  (and
occasionally  financial)  resources  and  remarking  that  the  organization  of  such
events  might  fall  better  to  the  responsibility  of  the  national,  rather  than
European,  authorities.  The  evaluators  conclude  that  the  Centre  should  focus

21

rather  on  the  organisation  of  European  Round  Tables  (which  Centre  has  also
held in the past). The Consultation with the Member States suggested that they
agree  with  this  conclusion.  The  proposed  amendment  therefore  takes  this
conclusion, while leaving flexibility to the Centre in how it should promote co-
operation  with  civil  society  at  European  level,  while  continuing  to  allow  the
possibility of participation in national events by the Centre’s staff.

Paragraph  (f):  this  amendment  simply  codifies  the  change  introduced  by
Council Regulation (EC) No XXX/03 following the decision that all agencies
should be required to produce a report on their activities by the same date (15
June)  each  year.  In  the  case  of  the  Monitoring  Centre,  which  also  has  to
produce  a  report on  the  situation  of  racism  and  xenophobia  in  the  Union  and
where the data often take a considerable time to be collated within the Member
States, the simplest approach is to separate the two reports.

Paragraph  (h):  this  amendment  overcomes  an  ambiguity  in  the  original  text
(“open”), thus clarifying that the documentation resources may be virtual rather
than  physical  and  recognises  that  other  such  documentation  centres  already
exist  (notably  at  the  level  of  the  Council  of  Europe  and  other  international
organisations).

– 

– 

Article 4

The  amendments  to  this  article  underline  the  need  to  add  value  by  focusing  on  the  EU
priorities agreed by Member States (such as in the fields of employment and social inclusion)
and to avoid duplication with other sources of information and to take account of information
provided from national sources. The changes to paragraph 3 adapt the field of operation of the
Centre to the modified competence of the Community in the area of racism and xenophobia,
particularly following the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam and Council Directive
2000/43/EC  implementing  the  principle  of  equal  treatment  irrespective  of  racial  or  ethnic
origin, adopted under Article 13 TEC  and the inclusion of Title  IV  on  asylum,  immigration
and  other  policies  related  to  the  free  movement  of  persons.  Sub-paragraphs  (a)  and  (b)
therefore  update  the  previous  reference  to  free  movement  of  persons  to  take  account  of  the
broadened competence in the field of immigration and asylum; sub-paragraph (c) is merely a
simplified  text;  sub-paragraphs  (e)  and  (f)  take  account  of  the  material  scope  of  Council
Directive  2000/43/EC.  As  stated  in  the  accompanying  Communication,  the  Commission,  in
common with other stakeholders, believes that the existing wording of the article  allows the
Centre  to  focus  on  aspects  of  racial  violence  and  incitement  to  racial  hatred  (and  where
legislative action has already been taken under the Treaty on European Union).

Finally, a new paragraph clarifies that the Centre may enter into contracts for the performance
of  studies  and  research,  in  addition  to  the  contracts  for  data  collection  with  the  Raxen
network. In addition, it clarifies a legal uncertainty which had arisen in the application of the
existing  Regulation  over  the  possibility  for  the  Centre  to  award  grants,  in  particular  to
international organisations, for activities of common interest.

Former Article 4

The former Article 4, requiring the Member States to provide information to the Centre about
relevant bodies in their territories to enable the Centre to establish the Raxen network is now
redundant  and  so  has  been  deleted.  Where  appropriate,  minor  provisions  have  been
incorporated into Article 3 above.

22

Former Article 5

Regulation  (EC)  No  45/200110  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  18
December  2000  concerns  the  protection  of  individuals  with  regard  to  the  processing  of
personal  data  by  the  Community  institutions  and  bodies  and  on  the  free  movement  of  such
data. As the Monitoring Centre is a Community body, Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 applies to
the data held and processed by the Monitoring Centre. Former Article 5 is therefore no longer
necessary and can be deleted. The recital which accompanied it has been adapted accordingly.

New Article 5

This  article  is  a  codification  of  the  amendment  proposed  introduced  by  the  Council
Regulation of 18 June 2003.

Article 6

Unchanged

Article 7

A  small  change  to  this  article  clarifies  the  potential  for  ad  hoc  co-operation  outside  the
framework of formal agreements negotiated by the Community

Article 8

The  amendments  to  this  article  flow  from  the  findings  of  the  evaluators  and  the  views  of
stakeholders consulted by the Commission in preparation for this proposal.

Size of the Management Board

The evaluators noted that the Management Board already consisted of 18 members and that,
with  enlargement,  this  was  set  to  rise  to  28.  They  noted  that  the  size  of  the  Board  already
made decision-making difficult and that the threshold for decisions – a two-thirds majority –
was an unnecessarily high hurdle for many decisions. However, they also concluded that the
sensitivity of the issue of racism and xenophobia was such that all Member States should feel
that they were represented on the Management Board.

The  Commission  agrees  with  these  points.  It  concludes,  therefore,  that  all  Member  States
should be represented on the Management  Board, but that decision-making should  be eased
by reducing the majority required for decisions and by devolving as many as possible of the
decisions to a strengthened Executive Board (see below). So the majority required is reduced
from two-thirds to an absolute majority of the total number of members of the Board, with the
chairman holding the casting vote. The Commission believes that an absolute majority, rather
than a  simple majority (that is a simple  majority  of  those  members present),  is  sufficient  to
protect  minority  interests  in  the  Board.  The  most  important  decisions  to  be  taken  by  the
Centre  –  that  is  the  long-term  strategic  direction,  the  medium-term,  three  year  work
programme, the annual report on the situation regarding racism and xenophobia, the Centre’s
conclusions and opinions and the appointment of and  exercise of disciplinary authority over
the Director (this text brings the Regulation into line with the approach adopted for the newer
Agencies) – should be reserved for decision by the Management Board, while the remaining

10

OJ L 8, 12. 1. 2001, p. 1

23

                                                
decisions  should  be  taken  by  the  strengthened  Executive  Board  to  facilitate  the  decision-
making process.

Finally, the Commission proposes that the Management Board in its new form should meet at
least once per year, rather than the twice foreseen by the current Regulation. This reflects that
fact that more decisions will in future be taken by the strengthened Executive Board.

Membership

The  evaluators  concluded  that  the  existing  Management  Board,  consisting  of  independent
experts  in  the  field  of  racism  and  xenophobia  from  all  the  Member  States,  brought
considerable  added  value  to  the  Centre  in  terms  of  the  substance  of  the  Centre’s  work.
However, they concluded also that the criteria for the appointment of members of the Board
(that is, that they should be persons with appropriate experience in the field of human rights
and  analysis  of  racist,  xenophobic  and  anti-Semitic  phenomena)  did  not  necessarily  qualify
them for many of the responsibilities given to the Board by the Regulation, especially in the
field of management. The evaluators concluded that a better solution would be for the Board
to  consist  of  representatives  of  Member  State  Governments,  supported  by  a  scientific
committee made up of the independent experts now on the Board.

As  noted  in  the  accompanying  communication,  the  Commission  accepts  the  evaluators’
analysis  but  does  not  reach  the  same  conclusion  regarding  the  proposed  solution  to  the
difficulty.  A  large  majority  of  the  stakeholders  consulted  by  the  Commission,  from  the
existing Board through  to  some  Member State Governments, believed that  the Management
Board played a vital role in ensuring the independence of the Monitoring Centre. At the same
time,  many  felt  that  the  evaluators’  associated  finding,  that  the  Centre’s  links  with  the
authorities of the Member States should be strengthened, was also correct. The Commission
therefore sought possible solutions which would meet these two conditions.

The  Commission  recalls  that  Council  Directive  2000/43/EC  implementing  the  principle  of
equal treatment irrespective of racial or ethnic origin must be transposed into national law by
19 July 2003. Article 13 of the Directive11 requires each Member State to designate a body or
bodies for the promotion of racial equality by that date. The Directive also requires that these
bodies  should  be  able  to  act  independently  of  Government  and  to  produce  reports  and
recommendations.

The persons responsible for the operation of these bodies in the Member States will be both
experts  in  racism  and  xenophobia  and,  necessarily,  have  experience  of  managing  publicly
funded bodies. The Commission proposes therefore that the Centre should draw on the skills
and experience of these individuals and that the Member States should appoint these persons
to the Management Board of the Centre. Not only will these persons bring the appropriate mix

11

1.

2.
–

–
–

Article 13 of Council Directive 2000/43/EC reads:
Member  States  shall  designate  a  body  or  bodies  for  the  promotion  of  equal  treatment  of  all  persons
without discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin. These bodies may form part of agencies
charged at national level with the defence of human rights or the safeguard of individuals' rights.
Member States shall ensure that the competences of these bodies include:
without  prejudice  to  the  right  of  victims  and  of  associations,  organisations  or  other  legal  entities
referred  to  in  Article 7(2),  providing  independent  assistance  to  victims  of  discrimination  in  pursuing
their complaints about discrimination,
conducting independent surveys concerning discrimination,
publishing  independent  reports  and  making  recommendations  on  any  issue  relating  to  such
discrimination.

24

                                                
of skills and experience to the task, but their independence of action is guaranteed at national
level and they have the necessary links to national Governments to be able to take account of
national policy priorities and to influence Government policy in the fight against racism and
xenophobia. Moreover, there are considerable benefits to be gained by the bodies themselves
through their membership of  a  European  network in  terms  of  mutual  support  and  the  direct
exchange of experience and good practice. The Commission notes that some Member States
already appoint the heads or senior members of their bodies to promote racial equality to the
Management Board of the Centre.

However, the Commission recognises the variety of approaches taken in  the  Member  States
and  accepts  that  there  may  be  equivalent  bodies  or  organisations  in  the  Member  States,  in
addition  to  those  formally  designated  by  the  Member  States  under  the  terms  of  Council
Directive 2000/43/EC. It proposes therefore that Member States should also be able to appoint
the heads of these other bodies if they so wish.

This proposal also has implications for the term of office of the members of the Board. If it
was reasonable to limit  the mandate of the  independent  experts  under  the  current  system  to
two terms of three years, that no longer makes sense for members who are appointed on the
basis  of  the  positions  they  hold  at  national  level.  The  Commission  proposes,  therefore,  that
the members so appointed should have no fixed term of office, but that they should hold the
position  until  such  time  as  their  responsibilities  change  at  national  level,  in  which  case  the
Member State concerned would be required to inform the Commission and the Director of the
Centre and to appoint a new member.

Finally,  the  Commission  proposes  that,  to  maintain  its  relative  importance  in  an  enlarged
Management  Board  and  to  ensure  that  its  separate  responsibilities  in  the  fields  of  racial
discrimination  and  in  the  criminal  aspects  of  racism  and  xenophobia  are  effectively
represented,  it  should  have  two  seats  on  the  Board.  It  proposes  also  that  the  Management
Board should be able to invite to its meetings as observers persons appointed by the candidate
countries (that is, currently, Bulgaria, Romania  and  Turkey).  The  Commission  believes  that
this will be of assistance to those countries in their path towards membership of the Union.

Article 9

In  the  light  of  the  findings  of  the  external  evaluators  and  the  changes  proposed  to  the
Management  Board,  the  Commission  proposes  to  strengthen  the  Executive  Board  both  in
terms of its numbers and of its responsibilities. The Executive Board should be composed of a
maximum of 10 persons, including the Chairman, Vice-Chairman of the Management Board
and  the  two  representatives  of  the  Commission.  This  number  secures  a  large  enough
membership to ensure a spread of views, while maintaining a group small enough to promote
effective decision-making. Decisions of the Executive Board should be taken in the same way
as on the Management Board, that is by an absolute majority with the Chairman holding the
casting  vote.  The  Commission  proposes  to  leave  the  decision  as  to  whether  to  include  the
person appointed by the Council of Europe in the Executive Board to the Management Board
itself, and not to impose this in all cases.

The  Executive  Board  should  in  particular  be  responsible  for  determining  the  annual  work
programme  in  the  framework  of  the  medium-term  programme  agreed  by  the  Management
Board, being responsible for the process of selecting the Director, adopting the draft and final
budgets  and  approving  the  accounts.  Following  the  adoption  of  the  Council  Regulation  of
18 June 2003, responsibility for giving discharge for the budget to the Director has passed to
the European Parliament.

25

The  Commission  proposes  to  remove  from  the  Regulation  the  provision  preventing  the
member appointed by the Council of Europe from voting on issues related to the annual draft
and final budgets and the approval of the accounts. In practice, as an independent member, the
member  appointed  by  the  Council  of  Europe  has  the  same  status  as  all  other  members  and
there is no reason why he or she should not be involved in these aspects. Moreover, this is an
entirely artificial distinction, as the decisions on the work programme, in which the Council of
Europe member is involved, have a direct impact on the budgetary issues.

Article 10

The amendments to this article clarify the relationship between the Director and the Executive
and Management Boards and add a responsibility to ensure that the performance of the Centre
is effectively monitored and evaluated, with a consequent duty to report to the Management
Board on the results of the evaluation.

The  Commission  recalls  that  it  made  proposals,  in  the  context  of  its  proposals  to  adapt  the
Regulations  establishing  the  agencies  to  the  new  Financial  Regulation,  to  harmonise  the
procedures  for  the  appointment  of  the  Directors  of  the  agencies.  In  the  event,  the  Council
decided not to pursue these amendments in that context. The Commission intends, therefore,
to bring forward separate proposals in the near future to deal with this question.

Article 11

Unchanged.

Articles 12 and 13

These  articles  are  a  codification  of  the  amendment  already  introduced  by  the  Council
Regulation of 18 June 2003.

Articles 14 to 16

These articles have simply been renumbered.

Article 17

This amendment brings the reporting arrangements up to date by requiring the Commission to
report on the performance of the Centre three years after the entry into force of the Regulation
and every five  years thereafter, taking into account the evaluations carried out under Article
10(e).

Article 18

This new article is a standard text in any recast instrument. It repeals the Regulation which is
being  recast  (in  this  case  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1035/97)  and  provides  that  any
references  to  the  repealed  Regulation  should  be  read  as  being  to  the  recast  version.  It  also
makes the link to the correlation table in the annex.

26

Article 19

Now  that  the  seat  of  the  Centre  has  been  agreed  upon,  the  current  article  on  the  entry  into
force  of  the  Regulation  is  no  longer  appropriate.  This  article  therefore  provides  that  the
Regulation will enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official
Journal.

27

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new
2003/0185 (CNS)

Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION

establishing a (cid:1) on the (cid:2) European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
(Recast version)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  and  in  particular
(cid:2) Article 13, paragraph 1, (cid:3) Article 213 (cid:4) 284 (cid:5) and Article 235 (cid:4) 308 (cid:5) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission12,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament13,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee14,

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

12

13

14

15

16

17

(cid:6) new

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1035/97  of  2  June  1997  establishing  a  European
Monitoring  Centre  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia15  has  been  substantially  amended16.
Since further amendments are to be made, it should be recast in the interests of clarity.

The Commission has produced a report on the activities of the European Monitoring
Centre  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia,  taking  into  account  the  findings  of  an  external
evaluation17,  which  underline  the  desirability  of  making  certain  amendments  to
Council Regulation (EC) No 1035/97.

OJ C […].
OJ C […].
OJ C […].
OJ L 151, 10.6.1997, p. 1.
[COM(2002) 406 final].
See http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/fundamental_rights/pdf/origin/Monitoring
Centre_eval2002_en.pdf.

28

                                                
(1)

The  Community  must  respect  fundamental  rights  in  formulating  and  applying  its
policies and the legal acts which it adopts. In particular, compliance with human rights
constitutes a condition of the legality of Community acts.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

18

19

20

21

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 2 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

The  collection  and  analysis of objective,  reliable and  comparable  information  on  the
phenomena of racism, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism (cid:2) and related intolerance, such
as Islamophobia and other forms of religious intolerance, (cid:3) are therefore necessary at
Community level to provide full information to the Community on those phenomena
so as to enable the Community to meet its obligation to respect fundamental rights and
to enable it to take account of them in formulating and applying whatever policies and
acts it adopts in its sphere of competence.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

The importance of respect for human rights has been stressed on many occasions  by
the Community institutions and the Member States.

In a Joint Declaration of 5 April 197718 the European Parliament, the Council and the
Commission  stressed  «the  prime  importance  they  attach  to  the  protection  of
fundamental  rights»  and  declared  that  «in  the  exercise  of  their  powers  and  in
pursuance of the aims of the European Communities they respect and will continue to
respect those rights».

On  11  June  1986,  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  representatives  of  the
Member  States  meeting  within  the  Council  and  the  Commission  adopted  a  Joint
Declaration  on  racism  and  xenophobia19  stressing  the  «importance  of  adequate  and
objective  information and of making  all  citizens  aware  of  the  dangers  of  racism  and
xenophobia,  and  the  need  to  ensure  that  all  acts  or  forms  of  discrimination  are
prevented or curbed».

On  29  May  1990  the  Council  and  the  representative  of  the  governments  of  the
Member States, meeting within the Council, adopted a Resolution on the fight against
racism and xenophobia20.

On  5  October  1995  the  Council  and  the  representatives  of  the  governments  of  the
Member States, meeting within the Council, adopted a Resolution on the fight against
racism  and  xenophobia  in  the  fields  of  employment  and  social  affairs21  and  on  23

OJ C 103, 27. 4. 1977, p. 1.
OJ C 158, 25. 6. 1986, p. 1.
OJ C 157, 27. 6. 1990, p. 1.
OJ C 296, 10. 11. 1995, p. 13.

29

                                                
October 1995 they adopted a Resolution on the response of educational systems to the
problems of racism and xenophobia22.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 8
(cid:2) new

(4)

On  15  July  1996  the  Council,  acting  on  the  basis  of  Article  K.3  of  the  Treaty  on
European  Union,  adopted  a  Joint  Action  concerning  action  to  combat  racism  and
xenophobia23.  (cid:2) The  Treaty  of  Amsterdam  strengthened  the  ability  of  the  Union  to
promote  police  and  judicial  co-operation  to  prevent  and  combat  racism  and
xenophobia. (cid:3)

(9)

On  23  July  1996  the  Council  and  the  representatives  of  the  governments  of  the
Member  States,  meeting  within  the  Council,  adopted  a  Resolution  concerning  the
European Year against Racism (1997)24.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

(5)

(6)

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 10

The European Council meeting in Corfu on 24 and 25 June 1994 determined to step up
efforts to define, at European Union level, a global strategy aimed at combating acts of
racist  and  xenophobic  violence.  To  this  end  it  set  up  a  Consultative  Commission
charged with making recommendations on combating racism and xenophobia.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 11

The  European  Council  meeting  in  Cannes  on  26  and  27  June  1995  called  on  the
Consultative  Commission  to  extend  its  work  in  order  to  study,  in  close  cooperation
with  the  Council  of  Europe,  the  feasibility  of  a  European  Monitoring  Centre  on
Racism and Xenophobia.

(7)

The  conclusions  of  this  feasibility  study  were  submitted  to  the  European  Council
meeting in Florence on 21 and 22 June 1996.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 12

22

23

24

OJ C 312, 23. 11. 1995, p. 1.
OJ L 185, 24. 7. 1996, p. 5.
OJ C 237, 15. 8. 1996, p. 1.

30

                                                
(8)

The  European  Council  meeting  in  Florence  reaffirmed  the  Union's  determination  to
combat  racism  and  xenophobia  with  the  utmost  resolve  and  approved  the  principle
underlying the establishment of a European Monitoring Centre.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 13

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 14 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(9)

In  order  to  carry  out  this  task  of  collecting  and  analysing  information  on  racism,
xenophobia,  and  anti-Semitism,  (cid:2) and  related  intolerance (cid:3)  as  well  and  as
independently  as  possible  and  in  order  to  maintain  close  links  with  the  Council  of
Europe,  it  is  necessary  to  establish  an  autonomous  body,  the  European  Centre  on
Racism and Xenophobia (Centre), at Community level with its own legal personality.

(10)

(11)

(12)

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 15 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

racism,  xenophobia,  and  anti-Semitism  (cid:2) and 

related
The  phenomena  of 
intolerance (cid:3)  involve  many  complex,  closely  interwoven  aspects  which  are  difficult
to  separate.  As  a  result,  the  Centre  must  be  given  the  overall  task  of  collecting  and
analysing information concerning several of the Community's spheres of activity. The
Centre's task will concentrate on areas in which sound knowledge of those problems is
particularly necessary for the Community in its activities.

(cid:6) new

The Community has also to contribute to the progressive establishment of an area of
freedom, security and justice

The Council has adopted Directive (EC) 2000/43 implementing the principle of equal
treatment irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, which requires the Member States to
take measures to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of racial and ethnic origin in
the  fields  of  employment  and  occupation,  education,  social  protection,  social
advantages and access to and the supply of goods and services.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 16

(13) Racism and xenophobia are phenomena which manifest themselves at all levels within
the  Community:  local,  regional,  national  and  Community,  and  therefore  the
information which is collected and analysed at Community level can also be useful to
the Member States' authorities in formulating and applying measures at local, regional
and national level in their own spheres of competence.

31

(14)

Therefore  the  Centre  will  make  the  results  of  its  work  available  to  both  the
Community and the Member States.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 17

(15)

In  the  Member  States,  there  are  numerous  outstanding  organizations  which  study
racism and xenophobia.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 18

(16)

The  coordination  of  research  and  the  creation  of  a  network  of  organizations  will
enhance the usefulness and effectiveness of such work.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 19

(17)

The Management Board of the Centre should consist of independent persons with the
necessary  expertise  in  the  fight  against  racism  and  experience  of  running  relevant
public bodies; to promote effective decision-making, certain responsibilities should be
exercised by a strengthened Executive Board.

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 20
(cid:2) new

(18)

In  order  to  enhance  cooperation  and  avoid  overlap  or  duplication  of  work,  the  tasks
assigned to the Centre pre-suppose close links with the Council of Europe, which has
considerable experience in this field, as well as cooperation with other organizations in
the Member States  and international organizations  which  are  competent  in  the  fields
related  to  the  phenomena  of  racism  and  xenophobia.  (cid:2) The  Management  Board
should  also  be  able  to  invite  observers  from  the  Candidate  Countries  to  its
meetings. (cid:3)

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 21

(19)

The  Centre  will  itself  be  able  to  decide  on  the  administrative  arrangements  for
cooperating  with  those  organizations.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  for  the  Community  to
conclude,  on  behalf  of  the  Centre,  an  agreement  with  the  Council  of  Europe  for  the
purpose of establishing close cooperation between the latter and the Centre. The same
will apply to the conclusion of any agreements with other international organizations
or with third countries which may prove necessary for the Centre to carry out its tasks.

32

Whereas  the  protection  of  personal  data  which  are  processed  and  exchanged  by  the  Centre
must  be  ensured  in  accordance  with  Directive  95/46/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of
the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing
of personal data and on the free movement of such data;

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 22 (adapted)

(cid:6) new

(20)

The  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  have  adopted  Regulation  (EC)  No
45/200125 of 18 December 2000 concerning the protection of individuals with regard
to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the
free movement of such data. This Regulation applies directly to the Centre, making the
previous provisions on the processing of personal data redundant.

(21)

The Centre must enjoy maximum autonomy in the performance of its tasks.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Recital 23

(cid:6) new

(22)

To have maximum impact on the policies and practices of the Union and the Member
States, the Centre should, without prejudice to its autonomy, take account in its work
programmes of the priorities of the Community.

(23) Co-operation with the relevant authorities of the Member States is essential to promote
the collection of comparable data with maximum added value at European level.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

(24)

The  Court  of  Justice  must  have  jurisdiction  to  hear  and  determine,  pursuant  to  an
arbitration clause, disputes regarding the contractual liability of the Centre as well as
disputes  on  the  non-contractual  liability  of  the  Centre.  The  Court  must  also  have
jurisdiction  to  rule  on  actions  brought  against  the  Centre  under  the  conditions  laid
down in Article 173 (cid:4) 230 (cid:5) of the Treaty.

25

OJ L 8, 12. 1. 2001, p.1.

33

                                                
(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(25)

This Regulation might (cid:2) should (cid:3), where appropriate, be adapted (cid:2) reviewed (cid:3) on
expiry  of  a  three-year  period  (cid:2) and  every  five  years  thereafter (cid:3),  with  a  view  to
deciding  whether  or  not  to  modify  or  extend  the  Centre's  tasks,  more  especially
depending on any changes in Community powers.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

(26)

The  powers  provided  for  in  Article  213  of  the  Treaty  to  collect  and  analyse
information  on  several  of  the  Community's  areas  of  activity  do  not  permit  such
information to be collected through a specialized, autonomous body with its own legal
personality.  Article  235  must  therefore  also  be  used  as  the  legal  basis  for  the
establishment  of  such  a  body  and  to  enable  the  information  to  be  transmitted  to
Community institutions and bodies and to the Member States.

(cid:6) new

(26) Article 13, paragraph 1 of the Treaty empowers the Council to take appropriate action

to combat discrimination on a number of grounds, including racial and ethnic origin
and religion and belief. However, the phenomena of racism and xenophobia are wider
than racial and ethnic discrimination alone, which makes it necessary to refer also to
Article 308 of the Treaty in order to ensure a comprehensive approach of the Centre.
These Articles provide, in conjunction with Article 284 of the Treaty, the competence
to collect and analyse information on the phenomena of racism and xenophobia
through a specialized, autonomous body with its own legal personality.

(27)

This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised
in particular by the European Convention on Human Rights, in particular Articles 10,
11 and 14 thereof, and by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
and notably Chapters II and III thereof,

(cid:6) new

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

(cid:1) 1035/97

Article 1

A  European  Monitoring  Centre  on  Racism  and  Xenophobia  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  «the
Centre») is hereby established.

34

Article 2

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

Objective and tasks

1.  The  prime  objective  of  the  Centre  shall  be  to  provide  (cid:2) the  relevant  institutions  and
authorities  of (cid:3)  the  Community  and  its  Member  States,  more  especially  within  the  fields
referred to in Article (cid:4) 4 (cid:5) 3 (3), with objective, reliable and comparable data at European
level  on  the  phenomena  of  racism,  xenophobia,  and  anti-Semitism  (cid:2) and  related
intolerance (cid:3) in order to help them when they take measures or formulate courses of action
within their respective spheres of competence.  (cid:2) In  so doing, the  Centre  shall contribute to
the development of the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice. (cid:3)

(cid:1) Article 3 (cid:2)

(cid:1) Tasks (cid:2)

2.  (cid:4) 1. (cid:5)  (cid:2) To  meet  the  objective  set  in  Article  2 (cid:3),  T(cid:4) t (cid:5)he  Centre  shall  study
(cid:2) gather information on (cid:3) the extent and development of the phenomena and manifestations
of racism, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism (cid:2) and related intolerance (cid:3), analyse their causes,
consequences and effects and examine examples of good practice in dealing with them.

To these ends, in order to accomplish its tasks, the Centre shall:

(cid:4) (a) (cid:5) (cid:2) in co-operation with the Commission and the Member States, (cid:3) (cid:4) develop
methods  to  improve  the  comparability,  objectivity  and  reliability  of  data  at
Community level (cid:5);

(cid:4) (b)

set  up  and  coordinate  a  European  Racism  and  Xenophobia  Information  Network
(Raxen) (cid:5);

(a) (cid:4) (c) (cid:5) collect, record and analyse information and data, including data resulting from
scientific  research  communicated  to  it  by  research  centres,  Member  States,  Community
institutions, international  organizations  -  particularly  those  referred  to  in  Article  4  (1)  -  and
non-governmental organizations;

(b)  build  up  cooperation  between  the  suppliers  of  information  and  develop  a  policy  for
concerted  use  of  their  databases  in  order  to  foster,  where  appropriate  at  the  request  of  the
European  Parliament,  the  Council  or  the  Commission,  the  wide  distribution  of  their
information;

(c) (cid:4) (d) (cid:5) carry  out  (cid:2),  cooperate  with or  encourage (cid:3)  scientific  research  and  surveys,
preparatory  studies  and  feasibility  studies,  (cid:4) including, (cid:5)  where  appropriate
(cid:2) and compatible with its annual work programme (cid:3), at the request of the European
Parliament,  the  Council  or  the  Commission.  In  doing  so,  the  Centre  shall  take
account  of  already  existing  studies  and  other  activities  (conferences,  seminars,
ongoing  research,  publications)  especially  of  those  centres  and  organizations  with

35

which  it  is  linked  in  the  European  Racism  and  Xenophobia  Information  Network
(Raxen),  in  order  to  avoid  duplication  and  guarantee  the  best  possible  use  of
resources. It shall also organize meetings of experts and, whenever necessary, set up
ad hoc working parties;

(d)  set  up  documentation  resources  open  to  the  public,  encourage  the  promotion  of
information activities and stimulate scientific research;

(e) formulate conclusions and opinions for the Community and its Member States;

(cid:4) (e) (cid:5) (cid:2) co-operate with civil society, including non-governmental organisations, (cid:3)
(cid:4) the  social  partners,  research  centres  and  representatives  of  competent  public
authorities  and  other  persons  or  bodies  involved  in  dealing  with  racism  and
xenophobia, (cid:5)  (cid:2) in  particular  by  promoting  dialogue  at  European  level  and
participating where appropriate in discussions or meetings at national level (cid:3);

(f)  develop  methods  to  improve  the  comparability,  objectivity  and  reliability  of  data  at
Community level by establishing indicators and criteria that will improve the consistency of
information;

(g) (cid:4) (f) (cid:5) publish an annual report on the situation regarding  racism and xenophobia in
the Community, also highlighting examples of good practice, and an annual report on
the Centre's own activities;

(cid:1) Regulation  XX/03  of  18  June
2003, Article 1(1) (adapted)

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(cid:4) (g)

formulate conclusions and opinions for the Community and its Member States; (cid:5)

(h) set up and coordinate a European Racism and Xenophobia Information Network (Raxen)
consisting  of  the  Centre's  own  central  unit,  which  shall  cooperate  with  national  university
research  centres,  non-governmental  organizations  and  specialist  centres  set  up  by
organizations in the Member States or international organizations referred to in Article 7;

(cid:4) (h)

set  up  documentation  resources  accessible  to  the  public, (cid:5)  (cid:2) promoting  co-
operation and avoiding duplication with other sources of information (cid:3);

(i) facilitate and encourage the organization of regular round-table discussions or meetings of
other  existing,  standing  advisory  bodies  within  the  Member  States,  with  the
participation of the social partners, research centres and representatives of competent
public  authorities  and  other  persons  or  bodies  involved  in  dealing  with  racism  and
xenophobia.  The  Centre  shall  take  the  findings  of  the  national  round-table
discussions or of other existing, standing  advisory bodies into account in its annual
report on the situation regarding racism and xenophobia in the Community.

36

2. The Network referred to in point (b) shall constitute the prime source of information for the
Centre. It shall be designed so as to ensure the provision of objective, reliable and comparable
information, drawing on the expertise of a variety of organizations in each Member State and
taking account of the need to involve national authorities in the collection of data

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 Article 3 (adapted)

Article 4

Working methods and areas of activity

1.  The  Centre  shall  carry  out  its  tasks  within  the  competencies  of  the  Communities
(cid:4) Community (cid:5)  and  in  the  light  of  the  objectives  adopted  in  its  annual  programme  and
with due regard to the available budgetary resources.

(cid:1) 1035/97
(cid:2) new

2. In pursuing its activities, the Centre shall, in order to avoid duplication (cid:2) and to guarantee
the best possible use of resources (cid:3) , take account of (cid:2) existing information from whatever
source and in particular of (cid:3) activities already carried out by the Community institutions and
by  other  institutions,  bodies  and  competent  (cid:2) national  and (cid:3)  international  organizations,
particularly  the  Council  of  Europe,  and  shall  ensure  through  close  cooperation  with  the
Council  of  Europe  that  it  provides  added  value.  (cid:2) In  this  context,  it  shall  take  particular
account of the priorities of the Community. (cid:3)

3. The information and data to be collected and processed, the scientific research, surveys and
studies  to  be  conducted  or  encouraged  shall  be  concerned  with  the  extent,  development,
causes and effects of the phenomena of racism and xenophobia, particularly in the following
fields:

(a)

(cid:2) entry, residence and (cid:3) free movement of persons within the Community;

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(b)

immigration and asylum

(cid:6) new

37

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(b (cid:4) c (cid:5) )

information  and  television  broadcasts  and  the  other  media  and  means  of

communication (cid:4) media (cid:5);

(c (cid:4) d (cid:5) ) education, vocational training and youth;

(d (cid:4) e (cid:5) )

social policy including employment (cid:2) , social security and healthcare (cid:3) ;

(e (cid:4) f (cid:5) )

free movement of goods (cid:2) access to and supply of goods and services (cid:3);

(f (cid:4) g (cid:5) )

culture.

4. The Centre may enter into contractual relations, in particular subcontracting arrangements,
with other organizations, in order to accomplish any tasks which it may entrust to them. The
Centre  may  also  award  grants  to  promote  appropriate  cooperation  and  joint  ventures,  in
particular to the international organizations referred to in Article 7.

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

Article 4

European Racism and Xenophobia Information Network (Raxen)

1.  To  enable  the  network  provided  for  in  Article  2  (2)  (h)  to  be  established  as  rapidly  and
efficiently as possible, the Member States shall forward to the Centre a list of the centres and
organizations of which they are aware referred to in that Article.

2.  Taking  into  account  the  list  referred  to  in  paragraph  1,  the  Centre's  Management  Board
shall invite the competent organizations in the fields related to the phenomena of racism and
xenophobia  or  those  organizations  the  principal  aim  of  which  is  the  analysis  of  those
phenomena, to be parties to Raxen.

3. The Centre may enter into contractual relations, in particular subcontracting arrangements,
with  the organizations referred to in paragraph  2, in  order to accomplish  any  tasks  which  it
may entrust to them.

The Centre may also enter into contractual relations, on an ad hoc basis and for specific tasks,
with bodies which are not part of Raxen.

The allocation of such tasks shall appear in the Centre's annual programme.

38

Article 5

Protection and confidentiality of personal data

1.  The  Centre  may  collect  personal  data  only  for  the  purposes  of  carrying  out  its  tasks  as
provided for under this Regulation. The Centre shall apply to its processing and exchange of
personal data under this Regulation the provisions laid down in Directive 95/46/EC. To this
effect, rules implementing these provisions shall be adopted, in particular with regard to the
rights  of  the  individuals  concerned,  the  confidentiality  and  security  of  processing,  suitable
safeguards  for  rendering  data  anonymous  before  disclosure,  and  the  internal  supervision  of
processing.

2. The implementing rules referred to in paragraph 1 shall be published in the Official Journal
of the European Communities. The Centre may not process personal data before the entry into
force  of  those  rules  and  unless  a  supervisory  authority  within  the  meaning  of  Article  28  of
Directive 95/46/EC has been set up and is operative.

Pending  the  appointment  of  any  such  authority  or  authorities  set  up  for  the  Community
institutions  and  bodies,  the  Centre's  activities  as  regards  data  protection  rules  shall  be
supervised by the Ombudsman provided for in Article 138e of the Treaty, in the context of the
tasks allotted to him by that Treaty.

3. Until the date of implementation of Directive 95/46/EC, where, under the provisions of this
Regulation,  the  Member  States  transmit  or  receive  personal  data,  they  shall  apply  their
respective national data-protection laws to the processing of such data.

Until the abovementioned date, a Member State which has transmitted data to the Centre, can
object to the transmission of these data to another Member State or submit that transmission
to the fulfilment of conditions, if no data  protection standard equivalent to  that of Directive
95/46/EC is guaranteed by the receiver for the processing of the transmitted data.

In any event, personal data collected by the Centre and transferred by it to the Community or
the  Member  States  shall  not  be  filed  and  subsequently  used  by  the  latter  in  a  way
incompatible with the purposes for which they were collected by the Centre.

4.  Member  States  and  national  bodies  cooperating  with  the  Centre  shall  be  under  no
obligation to provide information classified as confidential under their national law.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(2) (adapted)

Article 5

(cid:4) Access to Documents (cid:5)

Regulation (EC) No  1049/2001 of  the  European Parliament  and of the Council shall

1.
apply to documents held by the Centre.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(2)

39

2.
The  Management  Board  shall  adopt  the  practical  arrangements  for  implementing
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 within six months of entry into force of Council Regulation
(EC)  No  XX/2003  of  18  June  2003  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  1035/97  establishing  a
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.

Decisions taken by the Centre pursuant to Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
3.
may  give  rise  to  the  lodging  of  a  complaint  to  the  Ombudsman  or  form  the  subject  of  an
action  befor  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Communities,  under  the  conditions  laid
down in Articles 195 and 230 of the Treaty respectively.

(cid:1) 1035/97

Article 6

Legal personality and capacity

The Centre shall have legal personality. It shall enjoy, in each of the Member States, the most
extensive  legal  capacity  accorded  to  legal  persons  under  their  laws.  In  particular,  it  may
acquire  or  dispose  of  movable  and  immovable  property  and  may  be  a  party  to  legal
proceedings.

Article 7

Cooperation with national and international organizations

1. To help it carry out its tasks, the Centre shall cooperate with organizations in the Member
States  or  international,  governmental  or  non-governmental  organizations  competent  in  the
field of racist and xenophobic phenomena.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

2.  The  administrative  arrangements  for  the  cooperation  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  shall  be
subject to the approval of the Management (cid:2) Executive (cid:3) Board.

3. The Centre shall coordinate its activities with those of the Council of Europe, particularly
with regard to its programme of activities pursuant to Article (cid:4) 9 (2) (cid:5) 8 (3) (a). To this
end,  the  Community  shall,  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  provided  for  in  Article
(cid:4) 300 (cid:5)  228  of  the  Treaty,  enter  into  an  agreement,  on  behalf  of  the  Centre,  with  the
Council of Europe for the purpose of establishing close cooperation between the latter and the
Centre. This agreement shall include the appointment by the Council of Europe of a person to
sit on the Centre's Management Board.

40

(cid:1) 1035/97
(cid:2) new

Should  agreements  with  other  international  organizations  or  with  third  countries  prove
necessary for the Centre to carry out its tasks efficiently, the Community shall, following the
same  procedure  as  mentioned  above,  enter  into  such  agreements,  on  behalf  of  the  Centre.
(cid:2) This  provision  shall  not  prevent  ad  hoc  co-operation  with  such  organizations  or  third
countries. (cid:3)

Article 8

Management Board

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

1. The Centre's Management Board shall be composed of one independent person appointed
by  each  Member  State  (cid:4) persons  with  appropriate  experience  in  the  analysis  of  the
phenomena  of  racism,  xenophobia,  anti-Semitism (cid:5)  (cid:2) and  related  intolerance  and  in  the
management of public sector organisations, as follows (cid:3) :

(cid:4) (a) (cid:5) one independent person appointed by each Member State;

(cid:4) (b) (cid:5) one independent person appointed by the European Parliament;

(cid:4) (c) (cid:5) one  independent  person  appointed  by  the  Council  of  Europe  pursuant  to
Article 7 (3), and

(cid:4) (d) (cid:5) a  (cid:2) two (cid:3)  representative(cid:4) s (cid:5)  of  the  Commission.  The  members  of  the
Management Board shall be persons with appropriate experience in the field of human rights
and analysis of racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic phenomena.

The  persons  referred  to  in  point  (a)  shall  be  the  persons  responsible  for  the  running  of  the
body or bodies for the promotion of equal treatment of all persons without discrimination on
the  grounds  of  racial  or  ethnic  origin  provided  for  by  Article  13  of  Council  Directive
2000/43/EC or of an equivalent independent public body.

(cid:6) new (adapted)

Each member shall have a deputy appointed on a similar basis.

(cid:1) 1035/97

41

2.  The  names  of  the  members  and  deputy  members  of  the  Management  Board  shall  be
notified  to  the  Commission  for  publication  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European
(cid:4) Union. (cid:5)  Communities.  Their  term  of  office  shall  be  three  years,  which  shall  be
renewable once.

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)

Where a member appointed by a Member State no longer holds the responsibilities at
3.
national level by reason of which he or she was appointed, the Member State concerned shall
forthwith  inform  the  Commission  and  the  Director  of  the  Centre  and  shall  appoint  a  new
member in accordance with paragraph 1.

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

The Management Board shall elect its Chairman and Vice-Chairman and the other members
of the Executive Board referred to in Article 9.

Each member  of the Management  Board,  or  in  his (cid:4) or  her (cid:5)  absence,  his (cid:4) or  her (cid:5)
deputy,  shall  have  one  vote.  Decisions  shall  be  taken  by a  two-thirds  (cid:2) an  absolute (cid:3)
majority  of  the  votes  cast.  The  Chairman  shall  (cid:2) have  the  casting (cid:3)  vote.  The  person
appointed by the Council of Europe may not vote on decisions referred to in points (d) and (e)
of paragraph 3.

3. (cid:4) 4. (cid:5)  The  Management  Board  shall  take  the  decisions  necessary  for  the  operation  of
the Centre. In particular, it shall:

determine  the  Centre's  annual  programme  of  activities  (cid:2) long-term  strategy  and
(a)
medium-term  work  programme,  covering  a  three-year  period (cid:3)  in  accordance  with  the
budget and the available resources; this programme may be reviewed when necessary during
the year;

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(3) (adapted)

(b)

adopt  the  two  annual  reports  referred  to  in  Article  (cid:4) 3(f) (cid:5)2(2)(g)  and  its
conclusions and opinions and forward them to the European Parliament, the Council,
the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee
of the Regions; it shall ensure publication of the annual reports referred to in Article
(cid:4) 3(f) (cid:5)2(2)(g); the annual report on the Centre's activities shall be transmitted by
15 June  at the  latest to the European  Parliament, the Council, the Commission,  the
Court  of  Auditors,  the  (cid:4) European (cid:5)  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the
Committee of the Regions;

42

(c)

appoint  the  Centre's  Director(cid:2) ,  on  the  basis  of  the  selection,  delegated  to  and
carried out by the Executive Board. (cid:3)

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(cid:2) (d)

exercise disciplinary authority over the Centre's director. (cid:3)

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

(d)

(e)

adopt the Centre's annual draft and final budgets;

approve the accounts and give the Director discharge.

4. (cid:4) 5. (cid:5) The Management Board shall adopt its rules of procedure. The Board shall meet,
as convened by  its Chairman,  at  least twice (cid:2) once (cid:3) a  year.  (cid:2) It  may  delegate  any  of  its
responsibilities to the Executive Board. (cid:3)

The Centre shall forward annually to the budgetary authority any information relevant

6.
to the outcome of the evaluation procedures.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(3)

7.  The  Management  Board  may,  after  consulting  the  Commission,  invite  to  its  meetings
persons  appointed  by  the  countries  which  are  candidates  for  accession  to  the  Union.  Such
persons  shall  be  appointed  by  the  countries  concerned  by  analogy  with  the  criteria  and
procedures foreseen in paragraphs 1 and 2. They shall have the status of observers.

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

Article 9

Executive Board

1. The Executive Board  shall  be  composed  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Management  Board,  the
Vice-Chairman  and  a  maximum  of  three  (cid:2) eight (cid:3)  other  members  of  the  Management

43

Board,  including  the  person  appointed  by  the  Council  of  Europe  and  the  Commission
representative(cid:2) s (cid:3).

Each member of the Executive Board, or in his or her absence, his or her deputy, shall have
one vote.  Decisions shall be taken by an  absolute majority  of  the  votes  cast.  The  Chairman
shall have the casting vote.

(cid:6) new

2. The Executive Board shall supervise the work of the Centre, monitor the preparation and
execution  of  programmes  and  prepare  the  meetings  of  the  Management  Board  with  the
assistance of the Centre's Director. (cid:2) It shall in particular: (cid:3)

(cid:1) 1035/97
(cid:2) new

(cid:6) new

determine the Centre’s annual programme of activities, in accordance with the long-
term  strategy  and  medium  term  work  programme  determined  by  the  Management
Board and with the budget and available resources; this programme may be reviewed
when necessary during the year;

on  the  basis  of  proposals  from  the  Commission,  carry  out  the  selection  of  the
Centre's Director;

adopt the Centre's annual draft and final budgets;

approve the accounts.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

The Executive Board shall also perform any task entrusted to it by the Management Board, in
accordance with the latter's rules of procedure.

(cid:1) 1035/97

Article 10

Director

1.  The  Centre  shall  be  headed  by  a  Director  appointed  by  the  Management  Board  on  a
proposal from the Commission for a period of four years, which shall be renewable.

44

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

2.  The  Director  shall  be  responsible  (cid:2), under  the  supervision  of  the  Management  and
Executive Boards, (cid:3) for:

(a)

(b)

(c)

performance of the tasks referred to in Article (cid:4) 3 (cid:5) 2 (2);

preparing  and 
implementing 
programme(cid:4) s (cid:5) of activities;

the  Centre's  (cid:2) medium-term  and(cid:3)  annual

preparing  the  annual report(cid:4) s (cid:5),  conclusions  and opinions  as  referred  to  in  this
Regulation;

(d)

all staff matters and matters of day-to-day administration.

(cid:1) 1035/97

(e)

the implementation of effective monitoring and evaluation procedures relating to the
performance  of  the  Centre  against  its  objectives  according  to  professionally
recognised  standards.  The  Director  shall  report  annually  to  the  Management  Board
on the results of the evaluation.

(cid:6) new

(cid:1) 1035/97 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

3. The Director shall be accountable for the management of his (cid:4) or her (cid:5) activities to the
Management Board (cid:2) and the Executive Board under their respective responsibilities (cid:3) and
shall attend its (cid:4) their (cid:5) meetings and the meetings of the Executive Board.

4. The Director shall be the Centre's legal representative.

(cid:1) 1035/97

Article 11

Staff

1. The staff of the Centre shall be subject to the Regulations and Rules applicable to officials
and other servants of the European Communities.

45

2.  The  Centre  shall  exercise  in  respect  of  its  staff  the  powers  devolved  to  the  appointing
authority.

3.  The  Management  Board  shall,  in  agreement  with  the  Commission,  adopt  the  appropriate
implementing rules.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(4)

Article 12

Drawing up of the budget

1.
Estimates of all the revenue and expenditure of the Centre shall be prepared for each
financial  year,  corresponding  to  the  calendar  year,  and  shall  be  shown  in  the  budget  of  the
Centre.

2.

3.

The revenue and expenditure shown in the budget of the Centre shall be in balance.

The revenue of the Centre shall, without prejudice to other resources, comprise:

a subsidy from the Community, entered in the general budget of the European Union

(a)
(Commission section);

(b)

(c)

(d)

payments received for services rendered;

any financial contributions from the organisations referred to in Article 7;

any voluntary contribution from the Member States.

The  expenditure  of  the  Centre  shall  include  staff  remuneration,  administrative  and
4.
infrastructure  costs,  operating  expenses  and  expenses  resulting  from  contracts  entered  into
with the institutions and bodies belonging to the Raxen network or with third parties.

5.
Each  year  the  Management  Board,  on  the  basis  of  a  draft  drawn  up  by  the  director,
shall  produce  an  estimate  of  revenue  and  expenditure  for  the  Centre  for  the  following
financial  year.  This  estimate,  which  shall  include  a  draft  establishment  plan,  shall  be
forwarded by the Management Board to the Commission by 31 March at the latest.

6.
The estimate shall be forwarded by the Commission to the European Parliament and
the Council (hereinafter referred to as the "budgetary authority") together with the preliminary
draft budget of European Union.

7.
On  the  basis  of  the  estimate,  the  Commission  shall  enter  in  the  preliminary  draft
general budget of the European Union the estimates it deems necessary for the establishment
plan and the amount of the subsidy to be charged to the general budget, which it shall place
before the budgetary authority in accordance with Article 272 of the Treaty.

The  budgetary  authority  shall  authorise  the  appropriations  for  the  subsidy  to  the

8.
Centre. The budgetary authority shall adopt the establishment plan for the Centre.

46

9.
The budget of the Centre shall be adopted by the Management Board. It shall become
final  following  final  adoption  of  the  general  budget  of  the  European  Union.  Where
appropriate, it shall be adjusted accordingly.

10.
The Management Board shall, as soon as possible, notify the budgetary authority of its
intention to implement any project which may have significant financial implications for the
funding  of  its  budget,  in  particular  any  projects  relating  to  property  such  as  the  rental  or
purchase of buildings. It shall inform the Commission thereof.

Where a branch of the budgetary authority has notified its intention to deliver an opinion, it
shall forward its opinion to the Management Board within a period of six weeks from the date
of notification of the project.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(5)

Article 13

Implementation of the budget

1.

The Director shall implement the budget of the Centre.

By 1 March at the latest following each financial year, the Centre's accounting officer
2.
shall communicate the provisional accounts to the Commission's accounting officer together
with  a  report  on  the  budgetary  and  financial  management  for  that  financial  year.  The
Commission's accounting officer shall consolidate the provisional accounts of the institutions
and decentralised bodies in accordance with Article 128 of the general Financial Regulation.

3.
By 31 March at the latest following each financial year, the Commission's accounting
officer shall forward the Centre's provisional accounts to the Court of Auditors, together with
a report on the budgetary and financial management for that financial year. The report on the
budgetary  and  financial  management  for  that  financial  year  shall  also  be  forwarded  to  the
European Parliament and the Council.

4.
On receipt of the Court of Auditors' observations on the Centre's provisional accounts,
pursuant  to  Article  129  of  the  general  Financial  Regulation,  the  Director  shall  draw  up  the
Centre's  final  accounts  under  his (cid:4) or  her (cid:5)  own  responsibility  and  forward  them  to  the
Management Board for an opinion.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(5) (adapted)

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(5)

5.

The Management Board shall deliver an opinion on the Centre's final accounts.

6.
The  Director  shall,  by  1  July  at  the  latest  following  each  financial  year,  forward  the
final  accounts  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  Commission  and  the  Court  of
Auditors, together with the Management Board's opinion.

47

7.

The final accounts shall be published.

8.
The  Director  shall  send  the  Court  of  Auditors  a  reply  to  its  observations  by
30 September  at  the  latest.  He  (cid:4) or  she (cid:5)  shall  also  send  this  reply  to  the  Management
Board.

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(5) (adapted)

(cid:1) XX/03, Article 1(5)

9.
The  Director  shall  submit  to  the  European  Parliament,  at  the  latter's  request,  any
information required  for the smooth  application of the discharge procedure  for the  financial
year in question, as laid down in Article 146(3) of the general Financial Regulation.

10.
The  European  Parliament,  on  a  recommendation  from  the  Council  acting  by  a
qualified majority, shall,  before  30  April  of  year  N  +  2,  give  a  discharge  to  the  Director  in
respect of the implementation of the budget for year N.

11.
The  financial  rules  applicable  to  the  Centre  shall  be  adopted  by  the  Management
Board  after  the  Commission  has  been  consulted.  They  may  not  depart  from  Commission
Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial
Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No
1605/2002  on  the  Financial  Regulation  applicable  to  the  general  budget  of  the  European
Communities26  unless  specifically  required  for  the  Centre's  operation  and  with  the
Commission's prior consent.

(cid:1) 1035/97, Article 13 (adapted)

Article 14

(cid:4) Translation (cid:5)

The translation service required by the operation of the Centre shall, in principle, be provided
by the Translation Centre for bodies of the  European Union established by Regulation (EC)
No 2965/9427.

(cid:1) 1035/97, Article 14

Article 15

Privileges and immunities

26

27

OJ L 357, 21.12.2002, p.72 with corrigendum in OJ L 2, 7.1.2003, p.39
OJ L 314, 7. 12. 1994, p. 1.

48

                                                
The Protocol on the Privileges and  Immunities of the  European Communities  shall apply to
the Centre.

(cid:1) 1035/97, Article 15

Article 16

Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice

1.  The  contractual  liability  of  the  Centre  shall  be  governed  by  the  law  applicable  to  the
contract in question.

The  Court  of  Justice  shall  have  jurisdiction  pursuant  to  an  arbitration  clause  contained  in  a
contract concluded by the Centre.

2.  In  the  case  of  non-contractual  liability,  the  Centre  shall,  in  accordance  with  the  general
principles common to the laws of the Member States, make good any damage caused by the
Centre or its servants in the performance of their duties.

The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in disputes relating to compensation for any such
damage.

3. The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in actions brought against the Centre under the
conditions provided for in Article (cid:4) 230 (cid:5) 173 of the Treaty.

(cid:1) 1035/97, Article 15 (adapted)

(cid:1) 1035/97, Article 16 (adapted)
(cid:2) new

Article 17

Reporting arrangements

During the third year following the entry into force of this Regulation, (cid:2) and every five years
thereafter, (cid:3)  the  Commission  shall  forward  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the
(cid:4) European (cid:5)  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  a
progress report on the Centre's activities (cid:2) performance, taking into account the evaluations
carried  out  in  accordance  with  Article  11(e) (cid:3),  together  with  proposals,  if  appropriate,  to
modify or extend its tasks, taking into account, in particular, the development of Community
powers in the field of racism and xenophobia.

49

(cid:1) 

Article 18

Repeal

1.  Regulation  (EC)  No  1035/97  is  hereby  repealed  from  the  date  of  entry  into  force  of  this
Regulation.

2. References  to  the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this  Regulation
and are to be read in accordance with the correlation table in the Annex hereto.

(cid:1) 1035/97 Article 17 (adapted)

Article 19

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into  force on the (cid:4) twentieth (cid:5) day  following the  date of  the
decision  by  the  competent  authorities  on  where  the  seat  of  the  Centre  should  be  located
(cid:4) that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (cid:5).

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, […]

For the Council
The President

50

(cid:7)

ANNEX

Correlation Table

Council Regulation (EC) No 1035/97

This Regulation

Article 1

Article 2(1)

Article 1

Article 2

Article 2(2), introductory words

Article 3 (1), first subparagraph and second
subparagraph, introductory words

Article 2(2)(a)

Article 2(2)(b)

Article 2(2)(c)

Article 2(2)(d)

Article 2(2)(e)

Article 2(2)(f)

Article 2(2)(g)

Article 2(2)(h)

Article 2(2)(i)

-

Article 3(1) and (2)

Article 3(3)(a)

-

Article 3(3)(b)

Article 3(3)(c)

Article 3(3)(d)

Article 3(3)(e)

Article 3(3)(f)

Article 3 (1) (c)

-

Article 3 (1) (d)

Article 3 (1) (h)

Article 3 (1) (g)

Article 3 (1) (a)

Article 3 (1) (f)

Article 3 (1) (b)

Article 3 (1) (e)

Article 3(2)

Article 4(1) and (2)

Article 4(3)(a)

Article 4(3)(b)

Article 4(3)(c)

Article 4(3)(d)

Article 4(3)(e)

Article 4(3)(f)

Article 4(3)(g)

51

-

Article 4

Article 5

Article 5a

Article 6

Article 7

Article 4(4)

-

-

Article 5

Article 6

Article 7

Article 8(1), first subparagraph

Article 8(1), first subparagraph

-

Article 8(1), second subparagraph

Article 8(1), second subparagraph

Article 8(1), third subparagraph

Article 8(2), first subparagraph, first sentence Article 8(2)

Article 8(2), first subparagraph, second
sentence

-

-

Article 8(2), first subparagraph, third
sentence

Article 8(3), first subparagraph

Article 8(3), second subparagraph

Article 8(2), second subparagraph

Article 8(3), third subparagraph

Article 8(3), introductory words

Article 8(4), introductory words

Article 8(3) (a), (b) and (c)

Article 8(4) (a), (b) and (c)

Article 8(3) (d) and (e)

-

-

Article 8(4)

Article 8(5)

-

Article 9(1)

-

Article 8(4)(d)

Article 8(5)

Article 8(6)

Article 8(7)

Article 9(1), first subparagraph

Article 9(1), second subparagraph

Article 9(2), first sentence

Article 9(2), first subparagraph, first sentence

-

Article 9(2), first subparagraph, second
sentence

52

Article 9(2), second sentence

Article 9(2), second subparagraph

Article 10(1)

Article 10(1)

Article 10(2), introductory words

Article 10(2), introductory words

Article 10(2)(a), (b), (c) and (d)

Article 10(2)(a), (b), (c) and (d)

-

Article 10(2)(e)

Article 10(3) and (4)

Article 10(3) and (4)

Article 11

Article 12

Article 12a

Article 13

Article 14

Article 15

Article 16

-

Article 17

-

Article 11

Article 12

Article 13

Article 14

Article 15

Article 16

Article 17

Article 18

Article 19

Annex I

53

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

5.0

5.1

6.0

6.1

FINANCIAL STATEMENT

[…]

DATE: May 2003
APPROPRIATIONS:
[…]

BUDGET HEADING:
B5-8090 and B5-8091 European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
(Subsidy under Titles 1 and 2 and Subsidy under Title 3
TITLE:
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia
LEGAL BASIS:
Council Regulation (EC) No 1035/97 (to be recast)
AIMS:
Modification of the legal basis of the European Monitoring Centre, whose purpose is to provide the
Community and its Member States with objective, reliable and comparable data relating to racism and
xenophobia with the objective of supporting them when they take measures and formulate course of
action.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

CHARGED TO THE EC BUDGET

NATIONAL AUTHORITIES
OTHER

EXPENDITURE
-
(REFUNDS/INTERVENTIONS)
-
-
REVENUE
-
(LEVIES/CUSTOMS DUTIES)
NATIONAL
-

OWN RESOURCES OF THE EC

5.0.1 ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE
5.1.1 ESTIMATED REVENUE
5.2 METHOD OF CALCULATION:

12 MONTH
PERIOD

(EUR million)
6.5

CURRENT
FINANCIAL
YEAR
[n]
(EUR million)
6.5

FOLLOWING
FINANCIAL
YEAR
[n+1]
(EUR million)
7.8
(Increase related to
enlargement)

None

None

None

[n+2]
[…]
None

[n+3]
[…]
None

[n+4]
[…]
None

[n+5]
[…]
None

The Commission's original proposal for the Centre, made in 1996, foresaw a recurrent budget of between
€6 m and €7 m (1996 prices) and a staff size of around 25 posts. In the light of the forthcoming
enlargement of the Union and the attention which will need to be paid to the situation in the new Member
States, and in the light of the experience of collecting data in the existing Member States, the
Commission considers that this was a slightly conservative estimate. It is therefore proposing a total
figure for commitments of €7.8 m for 2004, with gradual increases to take account of indexation and
further small developments in capacity, in particular related to the need to strengthen the analytical
resources of the Centre.
The Budget for 2004 is based on a staff complement of 12 staff in grade A, 13 in grade B and 9 in grade
C. The budget for operational expenditure is € 3.8 m.
CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED FROM APPROPRIATIONS ENTERED IN THE
RELEVANT CHAPTER OF THE CURRENT BUDGET?
CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED BY TRANSFER BETWEEN CHAPTERS OF
THE CURRENT BUDGET?

YES

6.2 WILL A SUPPLEMENTARY BUDGET BE NECESSARY?
6.3 WILL APPROPRIATIONS NEED TO BE ENTERED IN FUTURE BUDGETS?
OBSERVATIONS:
The modifications to the Council Regulation contained in this proposal are cost neutral and can be contained
within the existing budget, modified to take account of the enlargement of the Union. Some savings will accrue
from the proposed restructuring of the role of the Management Board, but the savings will need to be devoted to
the functioning of the strengthened Executive Board. The additional costs to the Commission budget implied by
the appointment of a second representative to the Management and Executive Boards will be met from within
the existing staffing establishment.

Not
applicable
NO
YES

54