Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on:the 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) No 1035/97, andthe Proposal for a Council Regulation on the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (Recast version)(COM(2003) 483 final — 2003/0185 (CNS))
Date: 2003-12-10
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights

30.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/111

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on:

— the ‘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) No 1035/97’, and

— the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation on the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and

Xenophobia (Recast version)’

(COM(2003) 483 final — 2003/0185 (CNS))

(2004/C 80/27)

On 15 September 2003, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
proposals.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 25 November 2003. The rapporteur was
Mr Sharma.

At its 404th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 2003), the European Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 119 votes in favour and no votes against with one
abstention.

1. Gist of the Commission document

1.1.4.
efficiency, addressing the following aspects:

The Commission reviews the Centre’s organisational

The Commission document is divided into two parts:
1.1.
a Communication which evaluates the Centre and a proposal
for recasting its founding Regulation.

1.1.1.
The Communication constitutes the Commission’s
considered view of the progress made by the Centre so far and
takes account of the findings of an external evaluation carried
out for the Commission by the Centre for Strategy and
Evaluation Services and of
the various
stakeholders to this evaluation.

the reactions of

1.1.2.
The analysis first focuses on the primary objective of
the Centre, viz 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’, and on the means used to achieve this. It then looks
at the other activities undertaken by the Centre, such as round
tables, research, dissemination of information and data and
annual reports.

1.1.3.
The Communication goes on to examine the
resources available to the Centre and the appropriateness of its
objectives,
in particular in the light of the legislative and
political changes which have taken place since its founding.
This section also examines the proposals to alter its geographi-
cal coverage, its name and even the scope of its remit.

— management structure, comprising a management board,

an executive board and a director;

— the organisational structure;

— the development and monitoring of work programmes;

— finance and administration;

— recruitment and setting up the Centre;

— relations with the Commission and other European

institutions.

1.1.5.
The Commission, after summarising the main find-
ings of the external evaluation, concludes that the overall
picture of the performance of the Centre is mixed. The Centre
has made considerable progress, but it is clear that, in terms of
its output so far, improvements in quality and value are still
possible and necessary, particularly as regards the objectivity
and comparability of data. Furthermore, to have maximum
impact on the policies and practices of the Union and Member
States, the Centre should, without prejudice to its autonomy,
take account in its work programmes the priorities of the
Community.

The findings set out in the Communication are reflected
1.2.
in the second part of
the document which contains a
recast version of Council Regulation (EC) No 1035/97 which
established the Centre and governs its activities.

C 80/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.3.2004

2. General comments

2.1.
The Committee organised a hearing entitled The role
and the function of the European Monitoring Centre on
Racism and Xenophobia on 7 October 2003. A range of
representatives of national and European civil society organis-
ations attended to give their views on the Commission’s
communication. Their views have informed the Committee’s
opinion.

There is much in this Communication that the Com-

2.2.
mittee can welcome, in particular:

— The Commission’s rejection of the independent evalua-
tor’s recommendation that
the EUMC
should consist of representatives of Members States’
governments. The proposal is rejected on the basis that
this is likely to be seen as unacceptable interference in the
independence of the Monitoring Centre.

the Board of

— The Commission’s restatement of the need to ensure that
the EUMC continues to enjoy complete independence
from Member States.

— The extension of the EUMC’s role, tasks and areas of
activity in keeping with the developments in the European
Community’s competencies since the adoption of the
Regulation (EC) No 1035/97 (Article 13, Amsterdam
Treaty and Community competence in the areas of
Immigration, Refugee and Asylum issues).

— The linking of the EUMC’s objective to the development
of the EU as an area of freedom, security and justice.

— The linking of the EUMC’s work to the priorities of the
EU, so as to inform the policy development process at
European and at Member State levels.

— The EUMC’s remit has been formally extended to include
other forms of related intolerance, for example, religious
intolerance.

— Widening the EUMC’s remit to enable it to engage with

candidate countries.

— The placing of greater emphasis on measuring the
performance of the EUMC against its objectives and
programme of work.

— The adjustments that have been made to the Regulation
with regard to the decision-making processes of the
Management Board and Executive Board which should
lead to more efficient decision-making.

— The inclusion of organisational management, planning
and budgetary control as required competencies of Board
Members.

3. Specific comments

3.1. The objective

3.1.1.
as follows:

The recast objective of the Monitoring Centre reads

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

The Committee agrees with the European Com-
3.1.2.
mission that the focus of the EUMC should remain racism and
xenophobia and that the scope of the remit of the EUMC
should not be broadened to include other ground of discrimi-
nation like gender, sexual orientation, age, etc. At the same
time the Committee agrees with the European Commission
that the scope of the phenomena of racism and xenophobia
should be interpreted broadly and should encompass related
intolerance.

3.1.3.
At the same time the Committee welcomes the
extension of the EUMC’s role, tasks and areas of activity in
keeping with the developments in the European Community’s
competencies, e.g. inclusion of Article 13 in the Treaty and the
Community competence in the areas of Immigration, Refugee
and Asylum issues.

— Allowing greater flexibility for joint ventures between the
EUMC and other international organisations such as the
Council of Europe.

Further under Article 3 concerning the tasks, the
3.1.4.
Centre is tasked with the following:
‘(c) collect, record and
analyse information and data’, and ‘(g) formulate conclusions
and opinions for the Community and its Member States’.

30.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/113

Rather than is the case under the current version of
3.1.5.
the Regulation, the new Article 2 ‘Objective’, stipulates that
the primary recipients of the information collected by the
Centre would be ‘the relevant institutions and authorities of
the Community and the Member States’. This would mean that
civil society,
the social partners and NGOs operating at
European level and in the Member States would no longer be
recipients of the information. In the EESC’s view, civil society
will, also in future, have a very important role to play in
combating racism, xeonophobia and anti-Semitism and the
attendant
intolerance. The EESC therefore proposes that
Article 2 be amended to read as follows: ‘The prime objective
of the Centre shall be to provide the relevant institutions and
authorities of the Community and its Member States, together
with civil society and the social partners, ...’.

3.1.6.
The Committee holds the view that, whereas it is
convinced that the Monitoring Centre should have a proactive
role in making policy recommendations to EU Institutions and
to Member States, this should be reflected in the objective. In
the view of the Committee the relevant part of the recast
objective should be amended by replacing the text ‘in order to
help them when they take measures or formulate courses of
action within their respective spheres of competence’ by ‘in
order to help them by formulating policy recommendations
which they can use to take measures or formulate courses of
action within their respective spheres of competence’.

3.2. Civil society involvement in the activities of the Monitoring

Centre

3.2.1.
At the present time the involvement of civil society
with the Centre is primarily through the national Round Tables
organised in individual Member States. The Commission is
the Centre no longer facilitate these
recommending that
meetings, thereby losing their only active involvement with
civil society organisations. However the new Regulation does
task the Centre under Article 3 (e) ‘to cooperate with civil
society including non-governmental organisations, the social
partners, research centres and representatives of competent
public authorities and other persons or bodies involved in
dealing with racism and xenophobia, in particular by promot-
ing dialogue at European level and participating where appro-
priate in discussions or meetings at national level’.

value of Round Tables and welcomes the proposal that EUMC
should be allowed more flexibility in how and by what means
it wants to involve civil society.

3.2.3.
However, the Committee also values the arguments
given by representatives of civil society organisations at its
hearing that the national round tables are to date the only
active interaction between the EUMC and the national civil
society organisations.
In keeping with the Commission’s
approach the Committee does not want to be too prescriptive.
However, to address the concerns of the civil society organis-
ations the Committee recommends that at national level the
EUMC should consult with relevant civil society organisations
and Member States on the design of appropriate formal and
informal structures for ongoing consultation. These structures
may include the convening of Round Tables.

3.3. Management and governance arrangements

3.3.1.
the majority of management board members are as follows:

The current arrangements for the appointment of

‘Member States appoint one independent person with appro-
priate experience in the analysis in the phenomenon of racism
xenophobia and anti-Semitism.

The Commission is proposing to restrict these appointments
to “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 ethnic or racial origin
provided for by Article 13 of Council Directive 2000/43/EC
or of an equivalent public body”.’

Additionally,

3.3.2.
the Commission’s representation is
increased from one to two members. The Committee sees the
value of this proposal.

3.3.3.
The Committee favours an inclusive EUMC, uniting
all stakeholders and holds the opinion that this should be
reflected in the composition of the Board. Hence the Com-
mittee favours inclusion of one representative of each Member
State, of relevant international partner organisations, of Euro-
pean institutions including the EESC (1) and representatives of
civil society organisations and social partners in the general
board of the EUMC.

During the hearing of civil society organisations
3.2.2.
involved in combating racism and xenophobia, it became clear
that while some Round Table consultations were effective in
some Member States this was not the case in others. The
Committee therefore accepts the Commission’s views on the

(1) See EESC opinion on the Proposal for a Council Regulation
(EC) establishing a European monitoring centre on racism and
xenophobia (COM(96) 615 final), in OJ C 158, 26.5.1997.

C 80/114

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.3.2004

The Committee shares the concerns voiced by several
3.3.4.
representatives of civil society organisations about the need to
maintain and strengthen the Centre’s independence, not only
with respect to the EU institutions but also to the Member
States which sometimes, disturbed by the Centre’s work,
sought to increase their influence over the Management of the
Centre. It is therefore important to ensure that the Centre’s
Management Board includes persons who are independent of
Member States. The EESC recommends the deletion of the
second paragraph of Article 8(1), which stipulates that the
representatives of the Member States are to be ‘the persons
responsible for the running of the body or bodies for the
promotion of equal treatment of all persons provided for by
Article 13 of Council Directive 2000/43/EC or of an equivalent
independent public body’.

3.3.5.
independence, we recommend that

In keeping with the need to maintain the Centre’s
informal

the current

arrangements whereby Member States have designated liaison
officers to work with the Centre should continue but should
not be formalised by inclusion in the Regulation governing the
Centre.

3.3.6.
The Committee subscribes to the argument of the
Commission that effective and efficient management of the
EUMC requires a limited executive management board of
persons with not only experience in the field of non-discrimi-
nation and equal
treatment, but with solid management
background and experience. This does not necessarily have to
be accomplished by limiting the sphere of recruiting Member
States’ representatives from circles of specialised bodies or
equivalent public bodies as meant by the Commission. This
can be accomplished by drawing up clear profiles for members
of
the executive management board, recruiting them by
transparent and open procedures.

Brussels, 10 December 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH