Report from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament on the application of Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers
Date: 2007-11-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: admission of aliens, application of EU law, basic needs, fundamental rights, right of asylum, rights of aliens

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 26.11.2007 
COM(2007) 745 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

ON THE APPLICATION OF DIRECTIVE 2003/9/EC OF 27 JANUARY 2003 
LAYING DOWN MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THE RECEPTION OF ASYLUM 
SEEKERS 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

On  27  January  2003,  the  Council  adopted  Directive  2003/9/EC  laying  down  minimum 
standards  for  the  reception  of  asylum  seekers.1  It  is  applicable  to  all  Member  States  except 
Ireland  and  Denmark2  and  was  designed  to  harmonise  the  laws  of  the  Member  States 
concerning  the  reception  conditions  applicable  to  asylum  seekers,  thus  contributing  to  the 
establishment of an EU-wide level playing field in the area of asylum and to reduce secondary 
movements. The Directive is one of the "building blocks" of the first phase of the Common 
European  Asylum  System,  as  provided  for  in  the  1999  Tampere  and  2004  Hague 
Programmes.3 

The present report, which fulfils the obligation laid on the Commission by Article 25 of the 
Directive, aims to give an overview of  the transposition and  application of the Directive  by 
Member States and to identify possible problematic issues. Its findings have contributed to the 
preparation of the Green Paper on the Future of Asylum Policy. 

The  report  was  prepared  on  the  basis  of  two  studies  conducted  to  gather  the  necessary 
information on the state of implementation and application of the Directive.4  

For those Member States (BE, EL, DE, AT) which had not adopted the necessary transposing 
legislation at the time of preparation of the report (end 2006), the information was gathered on 
the basis of available draft legislation. 

2. 

MONITORING OF TRANSPOSITION  

Member States had to transpose the Directive by 6 February 2005. 

The  Commission  Services  actively  assisted  the  Member  States  in  the  process  by  holding 
regular meetings with national experts.  

Following  expiry  of  the  deadline  for  transposition,  infringement  procedures  were  opened 
against  all  Member  States,  which  failed  to  communicate  or  to  fully  communicate  their 
transposition  measures.  Subsequently,  in  accordance  with  Article  226  of  the  Treaty,  the 
Commission addressed 19 letters of formal notice and 10 reasoned opinions. The decision to 
bring the cases before the Court of Justice was taken against 6 Member States. Three cases 
were withdrawn, one was settled5 and two are still pending.6 

1 
2 
3 

4 

5 
6 

OJ L 31, 6.2.2003, p.18. 
For the purpose of the report, "Member States" means the Member States bound by the Directive. 
Presidency Conclusions of the Tampere European Council, October 1999; Annex 1 to the Presidency 
Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, November 2004. 
EMN  "Reception Systems,  their  Capacities  and  the  Social  Situation of Asylum  Applicants  within  the 
Reception System in the EU Member States", May 2006 - study contracted to the Academic Network 
for Legal Studies on Immigration and Asylum in Europe "Odysseus". 
Case against Austria, where Austria was found guilty of failing to fulfil its Treaty obligations. 
Cases against Greece and Germany 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS  

3.1. 

Scope of application 

Under Articles 2(c) and 3, the Directive is applicable to asylum seekers from the time of filing 
their  applications  for  international  protection  under  the  Geneva  Convention  until  the  final 
decision on their application.  

Virtually  no  problems  were  detected  with  regard  to  whom  the  Directive  should  apply. 
Moreover,  the  vast  majority  of  Member  States  opted  also  to  apply  the  Directive  to  persons 
applying for subsidiary protection. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  main  reason  why  subsidiary  protection  was  not  included  in  the 
Directive  was  that  at  the  time  of  its  adoption,  such  a  concept  was  not  yet  part  of  the  EU 
asylum  acquis.  However,  with  the  adoption  of  the  Qualification  Directive7  the  concept  of 
subsidiary protection has become an integral part of the EU legislative framework on asylum 
which should be reflected in all asylum instruments 

Minor difficulties were detected with regard to the application of the Directive in time. 
Some  Member  States  whose  procedures  are  divided  into  numerous  stages  do  not  apply  the 
Directive, for example, to persons at the admissibility stage (ES, NL). Others only apply the 
Directive  to  applicants  who  have  already  registered  or  hold  a  particular  ID  card  (EL,  UK, 
CY).  Some  Member  States  also  limit  the  applicability  of  the  Directive  during  the  period  to 
determine  which  Member  State  is  responsible  for  processing  the  asylum  claim  under  the 
Dublin Regulation8 (AT, FR, ES).  

All  Member  States  comply  with  the  rule  whereby  the  Directive  is  applicable  until  the  final 
decision (i.e. a decision which can no longer be challenged under national law) is adopted. 

However,  serious  problems  exist  in  terms  of  the  applicability  of  the  Directive  in  all 
premises hosting asylum seekers. As many as seven Member States (UK, BE, IT, NL, PL, 
LU, CY)9 do not apply the Directive in detention centres. Other Member States (e.g. AT) do 
not apply it in transit zones. 

As  the  Directive  does  not  allow  for  exceptions  as  far  as  its  applicability  in  certain 
facilities  for  asylum  seekers  is  concerned,  its  provisions  apply  to  all  types  of  premises, 
including detention centres.  

7 

8 

9 

Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004, on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third-
country  nationals  or  stateless  persons  as  refugees  or  as  persons  who  otherwise  need  international 
protection and the content of the protection granted (OJ L 304, 30.9.2004),. 
Regulation  (EC)  No  343/2003  establishing  the  criteria  and  mechanisms  for  determining  the  Member 
State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-
country national, OJ L 50, 25.2.2003, p. 1. 
The situation of Spain, Greece and Portugal is not clear. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.2. 

Procedural rules 

3.2.1. 

Information 

Article  5  requires  Member  States  to  provide  asylum  seekers  with  written  information  in  a 
language they can understand on their benefits and obligations under the Directive and on the 
organisations providing legal or any other kind of assistance.  

Asylum  seekers  are  duly  informed  in  the  vast  majority  of  Member  States.  Only  a  few 
Member  States  have  not  fully  (DE)  or  only  partly  (AT)  transposed  this  provision  into  their 
laws.  

Some  problems  were  detected  in  some  Member  States  (CY,  SI,  DE  and  MT),  where  the 
information given on organisations providing assistance to asylum seekers does not seem to 
be sufficient.  

The  information  is  provided  by  all  Member  States  within  15  days  of  the  date  of  asylum 
application. The number of languages in which the information is available varies by Member 
State - from 3 (MT) to 34 (AT).  

Access  to  information  in  several  languages  is  essential  to  ensure  effective  access  of  asylum 
seekers  to  rights  guaranteed  to  them  by  the  Directive.  Therefore  Member  States  are 
encouraged to make use of financial assistance under European Refugee Fund10 in order 
to increase the number of languages in which the information is made available. 

3.2.2.  Documentation 

Article 6 obliges Member States to issue asylum seekers with a document stating their name 
and status within three days of their asylum application.  

Many  Member  States  do  not  comply  with  this  deadline.  Some  have  not  introduced  any 
provisions of this kind in their legislation (DE, NL, HU, EL, ES). Others have introduced a 
clear deadline in the legislation but do not comply with it in practice (IT, SE, UK, FR). 

All  Member  States  issue  appropriate  documentation  to  non-detained  asylum  seekers. 
However, both the form and the content of the document vary considerably. In particular, 
many Member States issue documents which do not specify identity, which, while permitted 
by  the  Directive,  causes  many  practical  problems  (e.g.  problems  with  opening  a  bank 
account).  A  harmonised  model  the  documents  delivered  to  asylum  seekers,  which  would 
specify their identity, would help to overcome such practical problems. 

Virtually all Member States do not issue documents to detained asylum seekers as authorised 
by the Directive (exceptions being NL, CY, IT).  

In most Member States the documents are valid throughout the whole procedure and in those 
where the validity is limited (from 2 months to 1 year) the renewal procedure does not create 
any problems. 

10 

Council Decision of 2 December 2004 establishing the European Refugee Fund for the period 2005 to 
2005, OJ L381 of 28.12.2004, p. 52. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.2.3.  Procedure for withdrawal of reception conditions 

If,  pursuant  to  Article  16(1)-(3),  a  decision  is  taken  to  withdraw  reception  conditions,  the 
Directive  contains  certain  procedural  rules  (Article  16(4)),  including  the  right  to  appeal 
against a negative decision and the right to free legal assistance during the appeal (Article 21).  

No  major  problems  were  found  as  regards  guaranteeing  the  individual,  impartial  and 
independent nature of withdrawal decisions.  

Certain  deficiencies  are  noted  regarding  the  possibility  of  appeals  against  certain 
negative  decisions.  While  all  Member  States  grant  this  possibility  for  detention  decisions, 
some  make  no  provision  for  appeals  against  decisions  affecting  individual  freedom  of 
movement (AT, UK, SK), withdrawing or reducing reception conditions (HU, SI) or against 
any  decision  other  than  detention  (ES,  MT).  Further  problems  consist  of  poorly  justified  or 
orally notified withdrawal decisions (NL, SI). All these situations are at variance with Article 
21(1). 

Only  two  Member  States  (CY,  EL)  make  no  provision  for  free  access  to  legal  assistance 
during an appeal. Some Member States grant this only to asylum seekers who cannot cover 
expenses  or  to  those  whose  appeal  procedures  might  be  successful  (e.g.  NL,  DE).  Finally, 
practical  problems  with  effective  access  to  legal  assistance  were  reported  in  certain  other 
Member States (LV, HU, AT, EE). 

3.3.  Material reception conditions and family unity 

3.3.1.  Form 

Articles 13 and 14 oblige Member States to provide asylum seekers with material reception 
conditions  (i.e.  housing,  food,  clothing,  etc.),  but  leave  a  wide  margin  of  discretion  with 
regard to the form.  

Accommodation is provided in kind  in  the  majority  of  Member  States.  The  most  common 
form is collective housing. Only a few Member States (UK, BE, IT, SE) provide individual 
housing. The type of accommodation varies in some Member States according to the stage of 
the procedure (AT, FI, SI, NL, PL, CZ, SK). Very rarely, financial allowances are granted to 
cover  accommodation  needs:  France,  Italy,  Spain  and  Slovenia  –  lack  of  accommodation 
places;  Belgium  and  Portugal  –  according  to  the  stage  of  the  procedure;  Cyprus  –  as  a 
principle. Food is provided in kind in the majority of Member States (with the exceptions of 
EE,  LV,  UK,  FI,  SE).  Although  the  way  the  clothing  needs  of  asylum  seekers  are  covered 
varies considerably, the Member States that grant financial assistance to this end are still in 
the minority (AT, FI, LU, NL, PL, UK, ES, SE, PT, CY, sometimes BE and AT). 

Additionally, even if essential material needs are provided in kind, asylum seekers are nearly 
always (except in Slovenia) granted financial allowances to cover certain other expenses. 

3.3.2. 

Sufficiency and family unity 

Under  Articles  13  and  14,  material  reception  conditions  should  be  sufficient  to  ensure  the 
subsistence  and  health  of  applicants.  Articles  8  and  14(2)  also  oblige  Member  States  to 
maintain the family unity of asylum seekers for whom housing is provided. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
No major problems were detected where material reception conditions are provided in 
kind and in reception centres.  

The number of accommodation places for asylum seekers matches needs in the vast majority 
of  cases.  As  required  by  the  Directive,  where  housing  is  provided  for  asylum  seekers,  most 
Member States guarantee the family unity of applicants. Only in two Member States (IT, DE) 
is  this  made  conditional  on  certain  procedural  requirements  being  met  by  applicants,  which 
might be at odds with the Directive. 

Some  Member  States,  however,  still  have  shortages  of  available  places  for  their  asylum 
seekers  (i.e.  CY,  IT,  FR).  Further  problems  were  found  with  regard  to  clothes  for  asylum 
seekers (SI, SK, LT, PL, CZ, LV, CY, NL) or the generally low level of reception conditions 
(LT, EL).  

The  adequacy  of  reception  conditions  provided  to  asylum  seekers  in  detention,  although  in 
general  different  from  the  conditions  afforded  to  non-detained  asylum  seekers  for  obvious 
reasons, may be questioned only in a few Member States (HU, LT, SI, EL, BE, IT, MT). 

The main problems concerning application of the Directive were discovered in Member 
States  where  asylum  seekers  are  given  financial  allowances.  These  allowances  are  very 
often  too  low  to  cover  subsistence  (CY,  FR,  EE,  AT,  PT,  SI).  The  amounts  are  only  rarely 
commensurate with the minimum social support granted to nationals, and even when they are, 
they might still not be sufficient, as asylum seekers lack family and/or other informal kinds of 
support. 

3.3.3.  Cases of withdrawal of reception conditions 

Articles  16(1)-(3)  specify  the  situations  in  which  reception  conditions  granted  to  asylum 
seekers  may  be  reduced  or  withdrawn  (e.g.  non-compliance  with  reporting  duties,  undue 
benefits from material reception conditions).  

Some  Member  States  withdraw  reception  conditions  in  situations  not  authorised  by  the 
Directive (FI, DE, NL and some regions of AT).  

Only a few Member States choose, under Article 16(2), to refuse the reception conditions for 
asylum seekers not submitting their applications as soon as possible (EL, MT, CY, UK). In 
the  latter  case,  however,  use  of  the  provision  was  seriously  limited  by  the  judgment  of  the 
House of Lords concerning compliance with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human 
Rights.11 

3.4. 

Rights  

3.4.1.  Free movement and residence 

Article 7 grants asylum seekers the right to free movement within the Member States in which 
they apply for asylum and to choose their residence. This right might be limited for a number 
of reasons (public interest or order, swift processing of application). 

11 

Opinions of the Lords of Appeal for Judgment in the Cause Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home 
Department of 3 November 2005, [2005] UKHL 66. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Non-detained asylum seekers 

Given the broad discretion of Member States in limiting the right to free movement and 
residence,  no  substantial  problems  in  application  of  the  pertinent  provisions  were 
reported.  

The  majority  of  Member  States  grant  the  right  to  free  movement  for  their  entire 
territory.  A  few  member  States  (CZ,  AT,  LT)  reserve  the  right  to  limit  free  movement  for 
public order  reasons. Two Member  States  (DE,  AT) regularly  restrict the free  movement of 
asylum seekers to one district. In certain other Member States free movement is restricted in 
practice as asylum seekers have to report to or stay in their accommodation centres at certain 
times (NL, SK, SI, HU, LT, EE, CZ).  

Some Member States do not allow asylum seekers to choose their place of residence (AT, DE, 
LU, NL, EL).  Others allow  this  under certain conditions  or at a certain stage of  the asylum 
procedure. A few Member States give asylum seekers a free choice, which very often is the 
only way of offsetting the lack of capacity in reception centres (e.g. FR, CY). Some Member 
States  also  use  the  provision  to  make  reception  conditions  dependent  on  place  of  residence 
(PL, FI, EE, LT). 

In some Member States, asylum seekers are free to leave their place of residence without any 
authorisation or subject to a purely formal request, which is normally accepted (CY, FR, PT, 
LU,  MT,  PL,  SE,  BE,  EE,  IT,  HU).  Other  Member  States  have  introduced  more  rigorous 
systems  of  control  based  on  limited  days  of  absence,  reporting  obligation  or  virtually  no 
possibility of leaving save in exceptional circumstances. 

Detained asylum seekers 

Detention  is  foreseen  by  all  Member  States  on  numerous  grounds  (from  exceptional 
circumstances – Germany –to the general practice of detention of all asylum seekers illegally 
entering the Member State except for those with special needs – Malta). Similarly, the length 
of  detention  varies  from  7  days  (PT)  to  12  months  (MT,  HU)  or  even  an  undefined  period 
(UK, FI). 

However, given that according to the Directive detention is an exception to the general 
rule of free movement, which might be used only when "it proves necessary", automatic 
detention without any evaluation of the situation of the person in question is contrary to 
the Directive. Furthermore, the length of detention, except in duly justified cases (e.g. public 
order), which prevents detained asylum seekers from enjoying the rights guaranteed under the 
Directive, is also contrary to its provisions.  

3.4.2.  Access to accommodation centres  

Asylum seekers are entitled to contact UNHCR, their legal advisers and NGOs. 

No  particular  problems  were  reported  with  regard  to  the  application  of  Article  14(2). 
UNHCR, legal advisers and NGOs generally have good access to all accommodation centres 
(including detention) and contacts with asylum seekers. Some Member States grant access to 
accommodation centres prior to special authorisation (especially for NGOs). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
3.4.3.  Access to health care and employment 

Asylum seekers are also entitled to conditional access to the labour market and health care. 

Access to at least emergency health care, as provided for by Article 15, is guaranteed by all 
Member States, including for asylum seekers in detention. A large number of Member States 
have  broadened  access  to  health  care,  sometimes  granting  the  same  access  as  for  nationals 
(CZ, NL, PL).  

Due  to  the  considerable  flexibility  of  Article  11,  no  major  problems  were  found  with 
regard to the respect of the rules on the access of asylum seekers to labour markets.  

Half of the Member States restrict this to a maximum authorised period, i.e. to one year (CZ, 
EE, DE, FR, HU, LV, MT, PL, SK, SI, UK, CY). Nine Member States (EL, PT, AT, FI, SE, 
IT,  ES,  NL,  LU)  authorise  access  after  shorter  periods,  from  immediately  –  Greece  –  to  9 
months  –  Luxembourg.  Only  Lithuania  violates  the  Directive  and  does  not  provide  for  this 
possibility at all. 

Detained asylum seekers, for obvious reasons, have virtually no access to the labour market. 
This might not be consistent with the Directive in Member States where detention can exceed 
12 months (FI, UK).  

Very often, Member States  require  asylum seekers  to  apply  for  work  permits  (AT,  BE,  EE, 
DE, HU, LV, MT, NL, PL, SK, SI, SE, ES, LU, FR, UK), and limit labour market access to 
certain  sectors  of  the  economy  (CY)  and  the  amount  of  authorised  (sometimes  quite 
restrictively) working time (NL, FR, AT).  

Additional limitations imposed on those asylum seekers who have already been granted 
access  to  labour  market,  such  as  the  necessity  of  a  work  permit,  might  considerably 
hinder such access in practice.  

3.4.4.  Access to education  

Under  Article  10,  minor  asylum  seekers  or  children  of  asylum  seekers  (including  those  in 
detention) have the right to access to education at the latest within 3 months of the application 
for asylum. 

Non-detained minors 

While access to primary schools is not a problem, secondary education is often dependent on 
places available or decisions of local authorities (AT, SI, FI, HU). In a few Member States, 
minors might be granted access to schooling only at particular times in the school year, which 
might in practice cause delays (PL, FR). 

Detained minors 

Contrary to the provisions of the Directive, many Member States deny detained minors access 
to education or make it impossible or very limited in practice (AT, BE, FI, FR, HU, IT, PL, 
SK,  SI,  UK,  NL).  Only  in  a  few  Member  States  is  this  right  recognised  or  special  classes 
organised in detention centres (LV, CZ, LT, SE). 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
3.5. 

Asylum seekers with special needs 

3.5.1. 

Identification 

As special needs of vulnerable asylum seekers must be addressed, Member States are obliged 
to identify them (Article 17). 

Certain deficiencies in transposition were already found in the definition of vulnerable 
groups.  Although  the  majority  of  Member  States  recognise  such  persons  by  listing  all  the 
groups mentioned in the Directive or by using an open clause, some do not cover the full list 
in Article 17(1) or do not address persons with special needs at all (SK, FR, HU, LT, MT, PL, 
LV, EE and some regions of AT).  

Furthermore, in some Member States (UK, DE, AT, BE, LU, EL, IT, SK, SI) no identification 
procedure  is  in  place.  Despite  the  fact  that  it  is  not  literally  an  obligation,  there  might  be 
serious  doubts  as  to  how  and  whether  persons  with  special  needs  are  actually  identified  in 
Member States with no such tool.  

Identification  of  vulnerable  asylum  seekers  is  a  core  element  without  which  the 
provisions  of  the  Directive  aimed  at  special  treatment  of  these  persons  will  loose  any 
meaning.  

3.5.2.  Needs of vulnerable asylum seekers 

Addressing  the  needs  of  vulnerable  persons  has  been  identified  as  one  of  the  main 
deficiency in the application of the Directive. 

Vulnerable  asylum  seeker  must  be  provided  with  adequate  rehabilitation  services  (minor 
victims of abuse, neglect, exploitation, etc.), legal representation (unaccompanied minors) or 
necessary treatment (victims of any act of violence) – see Articles 17-20.  

While special housing needs are in principle addressed, adequate access to health care has its 
limitations,  e.g.  no  effective  access  to  medical  care,  lack  of  specific  care  (in  particular  for 
victims of torture and violence) and insufficient cost cover.  

Although  minors  are  generally  hosted  with  their  parents  or  other  relatives,  a  number  of 
deficiencies  were  detected  concerning  minors  with  special  needs.  In  some  cases  no  specific 
legal provisions have been adopted (EE, FR, HU, LV, LU). A number of other Member States 
have  practical  problems,  making  effective  access  to  special  arrangements  for  minors  more 
difficult, e.g. undervaluation of needs, lack of specialised human resources.  

Unaccompanied  minors  are  guaranteed  legal  representation  by  virtually  all  Member  States. 
They  are  generally  hosted  with  foster  families  or  in  special  centres;  tracing  of  their  family 
members  is  also  legally  or  practically  ensured.  Only  three  Member  States  (DE,  SE,  PT) 
choose to host unaccompanied minors aged over 16 in accommodation for adults. 

Serious  problems  might  arise  in  Member  States  which  do  not  exclude  the  detention  of 
asylum  seekers  with  special  needs.  Most  of  them  authorise  the  detention  of  minors  and 
many  of  them  even  authorise  the  detention  of  unaccompanied  minors.  As  the  level  of 
reception conditions in detention inevitably drops, it is hard to imagine how the special needs 
of  vulnerable  persons  (especially  minors)  might  be  met.  Even  if  some  Member  States  have 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
made  the  necessary  arrangements  in  this  respect,  they  do  not  address  all  groups  of  persons 
with special needs.  

Given  their  particular  situation,  detention  of  vulnerable  asylum  seekers  should  be 
considered only as a last resort, in duly justified case. In any event, detention should not 
jeopardise  their  access  to  the  rights  guaranteed  to  them  by  the  Directive  (i.e.  access  to 
adequate  health  care,  necessary  treatment  and  rehabilitation,  education  for  minors). 
Furthermore with regard to minors, the decision of their detention must also take into account 
the best interest of the child. 

Moreover,  as  far  as  unaccompanied  minors  are  concerned,  Article  19(2)  clearly  states  that 
they  should  be  placed  with  adult  relatives,  foster  family,  in  accommodation  centres  with 
special  provisions  for  minors  or  in  other  accommodation  suitable  for  minors.  Detention  of 
these asylum seekers may therefore only take place in full respect of this provision and only if 
the detention itself proves to be in the best interest of the child. 

3.6. 

Functioning of the reception conditions system 

3.6.1. 

Staff and resources 

Article  24  requires  staff  dealing  with  asylum  seekers  to  receive  appropriate  training  and 
Member States to allocate adequate resources to the reception of asylum seekers.  

Some  doubts  might  be  expressed  as  to  the  level  of  both  human  and  material  resources 
allocated to implement reception conditions systems in three Member States (IT, CY, MT). 

The issue of staff training is normally addressed either through legal provisions or in practice. 
Some  problems  exist,  however,  with  regard  to  the  subject  matter  of  training  courses.  The 
focus  of  training  is  very  often  on  women  and  minors.  Only  a  few  Member  States  provide 
training  concerning  victims  of  torture.  In  some  cases  a  lack  of  qualified  staff  (EE,  EL,  LT) 
and language training (EE, EL, PL) was detected. 

The principle of confidentiality of staff was broadly implemented as regards the employees of 
both  public  administrations  and  other  stakeholders  involved.  Certain  shortcomings  can  be 
highlighted in this respect where entire centres are run by private entities, such as NGOs. 

4. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Overall,  the  Directive  has  been  transposed  satisfactorily  in  the  majority  of  Member  States. 
Only a few horizontal issues of incorrect transposition or misapplication of the Directive are 
highlighted.  The  Commission  will  examine  and  pursue  all  cases  where  problems  of 
application were identified.  

Contrary to what was predicted following adoption of the Directive, it appears that Member 
States  have  not  lowered  their  previous  standards  of  assistance  to  asylum  seekers.  However, 
the  present  report  has  clearly  shown  that  the  wide  discretion  allowed  by  the  Directive  in  a 
number  of  areas,  notably  in  regard  to  access  to  employment,  health  care,  level  and  form  of 
material  reception  conditions,  free  movement  rights  and  needs  of  vulnerable  persons, 
undermines the objective of creating a level playing field in the area of reception conditions. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
How to find adequate responses to these issues goes beyond the object of the present report, 
as  it  requires  a  wide  political  reflection  on  the  level  of  ambition  of  the  Common  European 
Asylum System. These questions are therefore addressed by the Green Paper on the future of 
Asylum Policy which the Commission has recently published. 

Before  proposing  amendments  to  the  Directive,  the  Commission  considers  it  therefore 
necessary to wait for the results of the public consultation on the Green Paper. 

EN 

11 

   EN