WRITTEN QUESTION E-3126/03 by Astrid Thors (ELDR) to the Commission. The cross-border provision of gaming services for humanitarian causes.
Date: 2003-10-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: freedom to provide services, game of chance, information system, poverty, private aid, right of establishment, single market

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/225

Can the Commission establish objective criteria for the selection of working languages with due
3.
regard (amongst other factors) to demographics (cid:1) a criterion which should not be ignored? What action
does the Commission intend to take in order to re-establish language equality for all the Member States,
whose languages are the finest expression of their dignity and of their identity?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2004)

1. and 2.
working language for the purposes of internal work organisation.

The Commission certainly cannot confirm a trend towards the exclusive use of English as a

On the one hand, according to Council Regulation No 1/58 determining the languages to be used by the
European Economic Community (1), all the official languages are also working languages (Article 1) and
everybody is fully entitled to use them interchangeably in the institutions.

Second, for operational reasons it is normal that certain languages should be more widely used than others
by Commission staff in the day-to-day running of departments. Nevertheless, the principle that languages
are equal as official and working languages is respected. Nor has the Commission any intention of
introducing specific arrangements to give preference to the use of one or more particular languages
internally.

As a general condition for recruitment, Article 25 of the Staff Regulations requires applicants to have a
thorough knowledge of one of the languages of the Communities and a satisfactory knowledge of another
language of the Communities to the extent necessary for the performance of their duties.

As part of the administrative reform, the Commission has put forward measures to further promote
multilingualism:
it takes third
in addition to requiring a second language at the time of recruitment,
languages into account at the time of the first post-recruitment promotion.

The Commission also points out that it gives top priority to providing intensive language courses so that
officials who do not happen to know the languages most widely used for specific training courses (other
than language courses) when they join can improve their language skills.

3.
As regards communication between Commission departments and administrations in the Member
States and the public in general, the Commission abides strictly by the third paragraph of Article 21 of the
EC Treaty, which states that every citizen of the European Union can write to the institutions in one of the
languages mentioned in Article 314 and have an answer in the same language. This fundamental right has
been incorporated into the draft Constitution, not just in Article I-8(2) on citizenship of the European
Union, but also in Article II-41(4) in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

(1) OJ B 17, 6.10.1958.

(2004/C 78 E/0229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3126/03

by Astrid Thors (ELDR) to the Commission

(23 October 2003)

Subject: The cross-border provision of gaming services for humanitarian causes

Although Article 49 of the Rome Treaty guarantees the freedom to provide services throughout the
European Union,
to impose
restrictions on the cross-border provision of gaming services to safeguard their national public order.
Nevertheless, this right is not an absolute one, and any restriction imposed must be necessary to achieve
the objective pursued and must be proportionate.

Justice ruled that Member States have a right

the European Court of

C 78 E/226

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

In the Gambelli case, which is pending before the European Court of Justice, the Advocate General
concluded in its opinion of 13 March 2003 that restrictions imposed on a UK established online
bookmaker were discriminatory and not justified.

In light of the foregoing, does the Commission consider that, provided a duly established and licensed EU
gaming service provider whose gains are used for humanitarian causes offers all the necessary guarantees
in the field of consumer protection and measures against organised crime, cross-border restrictions of
online gaming services supplied by it violate Article 49 of the Rome Treaty?

In this particular humanitarian context and considering the de facto cross-border nature of information
society services, what initiatives will or can the Commission undertake to safeguard that the rules of the
internal market would be applicable to such properly regulated, humanitarian services?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2003)

The Commission notes that the European Court of Justice has recently ruled in the Gambelli case (C-243/
01) that Member States may impose restrictions on the cross-border provision of services to protect
general
interest objectives such as the protection of consumers or the maintenance of public order.
However, in line with the Court’s jurisprudence, such restrictions are compatible with the EC Treaty if they
are non-discriminatory and proportionate to these objectives and, in any event, they must serve to limit
betting activities in a consistent and systematic way. These considerations made by the Court are general
and, therefore, liable to be valid independently of the question whether gains are used for specific purposes
and in particular for humanitarian causes. It must also be stressed that the specific distribution of gains
could not be considered, per se, as being sufficient reason to consider that all the above-mentioned
requirements are automatically met.

The Commission has received a number of complaints from gambling service operators contesting the
application of existing national restrictions to cross border services. The Commission will now analyse
complaints in this area, in view of the recent ruling of the Court cited above and proceed with appropriate
action in order to ensure that the principles provided by the recent ruling of the Court in the area of
gambling are respected, including in the area of gaming whose gains are used for humanitarian causes.

(2004/C 78 E/0230)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3130/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(23 October 2003)

Subject: Fisheries (cid:1) OASIS (cid:1) Oceanic Seamounts

The June 2003 third newsletter of ‘OASIS (cid:1) Oceanic Seamounts: an Integrated Study’ (http://www.rrz.uni-
hamburg.de/OASIS) (cid:1) a study supported by the Commission (cid:1) the proposal to open up the 200 mile
Economic Exclusion Zone around the Azores, Madeira and Canary archipelagos to Community fishing
fleets has already led to letters being sent to the Commission from environmental organisations like
Greenpeace, Seas at Risk and the World Wildlife Fund, expressing their concern at the possible adoption of
such a measure.

OASIS itself says that opening up this zone would pose an immediate threat to the oceanic seamounts
(underwater mountains), and directly impact on its scientific work.