WRITTEN QUESTION P-3890/03 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Recognition in Greece of diplomas of Community universities.
Date: 2003-12-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, foreign student, recognition of diplomas, recognition of vocational training qualifications, student mobility, supervisory body

C 78 E/332

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2004/C 78 E/0350)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3890/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Recognition in Greece of diplomas of Community universities

Thousands of Greek students study at (state and other recognised) universities in many EU countries. These
students are awarded diplomas which are recognised in Greece only after being submitted to and approved
by the Inter-University Centre for the Recognition of Foreign Qualifications (DI.K.A.T.S.A.). This entails
long delays (owing to bureaucracy and the number of diplomas submitted) and substantial costs for
applicants.

Are Member States obliged under Community legislation to have bodies such as DI.K.A.T.S.A. to which
diplomas from Community universities are submitted? Do such bodies exist in all the other Member States
as a result of this obligation?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2004)

There are two types of procedures for recognition of qualifications and they have different objectives: the
academic recognition procedure and the professional recognition procedure.

Academic recognition aims to allow people to pursue their studies in another Member State.

Professional recognition aims to facilitate the free movement of workers within the Union. It concerns the
recognition of qualifications required for access to the professions in different Member States and is
governed by Community law (Directives 89/48/EEC (1) and 92/51/CEE) (2).

At the present stage of development of Community law, the recognition of diplomas for academic
purposes falls within the competence of Member States. There are no Community rules imposing mutual
recognition of diplomas. Each Member State is responsible for the content and organisation of
its
educational system. There are currently no diplomas that are recognised at European level. Universities that
are autonomous institutions are responsible for the content of their curricula and for awarding diplomas
and certificates to students. The authorities of the Member States have the right to require the academic
recognition of qualifications before allowing access to education and they can evaluate whether the content
of the education received by the holder of a diploma corresponds to the level that is required by the
legislation. They are equally free to fix the rules governing this type of procedure. They are
national
obliged, however, not
in
accordance with Article 12 of the EC Treaty.

to apply any direct or indirect discrimination on grounds of nationality,

In most Member States the higher education institutions take their own decisions on the admission of
foreign students. Some Member States have set up bodies responsible for the academic recognition of
diplomas, similar to Dikatsa.

As regards recognition for professional purposes, the different Member States have set up competent
authorities dealing with the professional recognition of diplomas.

In the countries participating in the Socrates programme a network of national information centres for the
recognition of diplomas
recognition
procedures. Most NARICs do not take decisions but offer on request information and advice on foreign
education systems and qualifications.

(NARIC) operates, which provides

information on national

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/333

The Commission is aware of the problem of the excessively long delays and other malfunctions of the
academic recognition procedure in Greece.

Although, as stated above, the academic recognition of diplomas falls within the competence of the
Member States, the Commission is of the opinion that the delays caused by purely administrative reasons
in the academic recognition procedure in Greece can discourage students from exercising their right to free
movement. The excessive length of the administrative procedure can raise obstacles to the free movement
of students.

The Commission has already contacted the Greek authorities asking what are the reasons that justify the
delays in the academic recognition procedure. The Greek authorities have informed the Commission that
the delays were in part due to the large number of applications received by Dikatsa. In order to expedite
the process of recognition, the Greek authorities have reviewed the relevant national regulations and
proposed to put new procedures in place. Dikatsa has been restructured in order to be able to deal with
the large number of applications effectively.

The Commission continues to follow the evolution of the process of academic recognition in Greece.

(1) Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education
diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration, OJ L 19,
24.1.1989.

(2) Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional

education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC, OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(2004/C 78 E/0351)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3892/03

by Nicole Thomas-Mauro (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Opinion of AFSSA

In its opinion of 3 December 2003 the French Food Safety Agency (Agence française de sécurité sanitaire
des aliments (cid:1) AFSSA) expressed serious reservations about BT 11 maize and took the view that the tests
carried out on animals by the Swiss firm Syngenta, which is presenting the application, were insufficient.

The matter was referred to the agency by the French Government on 18 November, in advance of the
European vote, in which France will be taking part in Brussels on Monday, to decide whether or not to
authorise importation of this tinned maize for human consumption. The opinion of AFSSA was of course
sought on a consultative basis.

This is the third time that the food safety agency has delivered an opinion on this subject. It has twice
issued unfavourable opinions, on 21 July 2000 and 20 March 2001, stressing the inadequacy of the tests
carried out on animals.

The Commission wishes to authorise BT 11 maize, but what account does it take of the opinions of the
national agencies working with EFSA, including the abovementioned opinion?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2004)

The first opinion of the French Food Safety Agency (AFSSA) on the genetically modified sweet maize,
BT 11, delivered on 21 July 2000, was submitted to the Commission in the context of reasoned objections
by France to the initial assessment report of sweet maize BT 11 carried out by the competent authorities of
the Netherlands under Article 4 of the Novel Food Regulation (EC) No 258/97 (1).

These objections, and those raised by other Member States, were referred by the Commission to the
Scientific Committee on Food (SCF). The subsequent AFSSA opinion, of 20 March 2001, was also
transmitted to the SCF for consideration.