OPINION OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border enforcement in the field of road safety
Date: 2011-09-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU police cooperation, approximation of laws, cross-frontier data flow, data protection, road safety, traffic offence

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 2.9.2011 
COM(2011) 533 final 

2008/0062 (COD) 

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION 

pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
on the European Parliament's amendment[s] 
to the Council's position regarding the  
proposal for a 

Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border 
enforcement in the field of road safety 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
2008/0062 (COD) 

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION 

pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 
on the European Parliament's amendment[s] 
to the Council's position regarding the  
proposal for a 

Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border 
enforcement in the field of road safety 

1. 

BACKGROUND 

Date of transmission of the proposal to the EP and the Council 
COM(2008) 151 final – 2008/0062(COD) 

Date of the opinion of the European Economic and Social 
Committee: 

19/03/2008 

17/09/2008 

Date of the opinion of the European Parliament at first reading: 

17/12/2008 

Date  of 
(unanimity): 

the  Council's  political  agreement  at  first  reading 

02/12/2010 

Date  of  formal  adoption  of  the  Council’s  position  at  first  reading 
(unanimity) 

17/03/2011 

Date of Parliament’s opinion at second reading 

6/07/2011 

2. 

OBJECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL 

The  Commission  proposal  aims  at  improving  road  safety  by  establishing  a  system  of 
information exchange between the State of offence and the State of registration on the most 
serious road safety infringements. It serves to identify the vehicle owner who has committed 
an offence in a Member State other than the one where his vehicle is registered; the Member 
State of offence would then be in a position to prosecute and sanction him. 

The offences covered by the Commission proposal are speeding, non-use of a seatbelt, failing 
to stop at a red traffic light and drink-driving. These traffic offences are  responsible  for  the 
greatest number of road accidents and fatalities.  

The text also defines the exchange procedures (data, responsible authorities and network) and 
provides  for  a  model  of  notification  letter  that  will  be  sent  to  the  holder  of  the  registration 
certificate. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
3. 

COMMISSION’S  OPINION  ON  THE  AMENDMENTS  PROPOSED  BY 
PARLIAMENT 

3.1 

General comments 

On the basis of the recommendation voted by the Committee on Transport and Tourism on 24 
April  2011  concerning  the  Council’s  first-reading  position,  a  number  of  informal  contacts 
took place between the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission with a view to 
reaching an agreement on this dossier at second reading. Following these contacts, an overall 
compromise amendment was presented by the TRAN Committee and subsequently voted by 
the  plenary  on  6  July  2011.  The  Commission  endorses  this  compromise  amendment  on 
substance, while recalling its position already expressed at first reading concerning the choice 
of the “police cooperation” legal basis by both co-legislators on the one hand and the absence 
of correlation tables in the text on the other hand (see point 4). 

3.2 

Amendments of the European Parliament at second reading  

Apart  from  the  legal  basis  issue,  the  Council's  position  at  first  reading  has  already  been 
supported  by  the  Commission  as  far  as  its  substance  is  concerned  (see  the  Commission’s 
opinion  on  the  Council’s  position1).  The  most  important  changes  introduced  by  the 
amendments of the European Parliament to the Council's position are as follows:  

(1) 

Information letter: clarification that, when the Member State of offence decides 
to  initiate  a  follow-up  procedure,  an  information  letter  to  the  offender  is 
obligatory.  

(2)  Strengthening  of  the  provisions  on  data  protection  in  order  to  avoid  the 

possible misuse of personal data. 

(3) 

Introduction  of  a  new  provision  on  delegated  acts  in  order  to  enable  the 
modification of the technical annex regarding the data set for the information 
exchange. 

(4)  Strengthened  revision  clause  in  order  for  the  Commission  to  assess  whether 
new legislative proposals are needed on the development of common standards 
for automatic checking equipment, on the harmonisation of traffic rules as well 
as on the establishment of common criteria regarding the follow-up procedures. 
It  also  includes  a  Commission  statement  that  it  will  examine  the  need  to 
develop  guidelines  at  EU  level  in  order  to  ensure  greater  convergence  in  the 
enforcement of road traffic rules by Member States.  

3.3 

Statement on the legal basis 

With regard to the choice of the legal basis, the Commission considers that from a legal and 
institutional perspective the “police cooperation” legal basis (Article 87 paragraph 2), which 
was retained by the Council at first reading and not challenged by the European Parliament at 
second reading, does not constitute the appropriate legal basis for this Directive. Against this 
background, the Commission entered a statement to the Council minutes reserving its right to 
use all legal means at its disposal (see Commission’s statement under point 4). 

1 

COM (2011) 148 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.4 

Statement on the correlation table  

The  agreement  does  not  foresee  any  obligation  for  Member  States  to  transmit  to  the 
Commission  a  correlation  table,  in  spite  of  the  general  line  usually  taken  by  the  European 
Parliament on the matter. Considering the particularities of the file (unanimity rule in Council, 
2nd reading agreement), co-legislators agreed on a solution concerning correlation tables that 
would not affect on-going inter-institutional discussion on this matter. 

Council and European Parliament issued a joint statement underlining that the adoption of this 
Directive  does  not  prejudge  the  outcome  of  inter-institutional  negotiations  on  correlation 
tables.  

In addition, the Commission issued a statement which regrets the absence of correlation tables 
in  the  main  body  of  the  text  and  confirms  the  commitment  of  the  Commission  towards 
ensuring  that  Member  States  establish  correlation  tables  linking  the  transposition  measures 
they adopt with the Directive. In a spirit of compromise however and in order to facilitate the 
immediate  adoption  of  this  proposal,  the  Commission  also  indicated  that  it  can  accept  the 
substitution  of  the  obligatory  provision  on  correlation  tables  included  in  the  text  with  a 
relevant  recital  encouraging  Member  States  to  follow  this  practice,  but  stressed  that  its 
position followed in this file shall not be considered as a precedent (see point 4) 

4. 

CONCLUSIONS/GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 

The European Parliament adopted its second reading amendments on 6 July 2011 following 
informal contacts with the Council and the Commission.  
While the Commission confirms that it endorses the overall compromise amendment voted as 
it reflects the main objectives of its proposal, the change of the legal basis however has led the 
Commission to confirm the following statement:  

"The  Commission  notes  that  both  Council  and  European  Parliament  agree  on  the 
replacement  of  the  legal  basis  proposed  by  the  Commission,  namely  Article  91, 
paragraph  1c,  TFEU  by  Article  87,  paragraph  2,  TFEU.  While  the  Commission 
shares the view of both co-legislators about the importance of pursuing the aims of 
the  proposed  Directive  to  improve  road  safety  ,  it  considers  however  from  a  legal 
and institutional perspective that Article 87, paragraph 2, TFEU does not constitute 
the appropriate legal basis and therefore reserves its right to use all legal means at 
its disposal. "  

Concerning the revision clause and further steps to be undertaken by the Commission for road 
safety, the Commission issued the following statement:  

"The Commission will examine the need to develop guidelines at EU level in order to 
ensure  greater  convergence  in  the  enforcement  of  road  traffic  rules  by  Member 
States through comparable methods, practices, standards and frequency of controls, 
in particular in relation to speeding, drink-driving, non-use of seatbelts and failing 
to stop at a red traffic light". 

On  the  correlation  tables’  issue,  while  the  Commission  accepts  the  substitution  of  the 
obligatory  provision  on  correlation  tables  included  in  the  text  with  a  relevant  recital 
encouraging Member States to follow this practice, it however made the following statement 
to recall its position on this horizontal question. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
“The  Commission  recalls  its  commitment  towards  ensuring  that  Member  States 
establish  correlation  tables  linking  the  transposition  measures  they  adopt  with  the 
EU  directive  and  communicate  them  to  the  Commission  in  the  framework  of 
transposing  EU  legislation,  in  the  interest  of  citizens,  better-law  making  and 
increasing  legal  transparency  and  to  assist  the  examination  of  the  conformity  of 
national rules with EU provisions. 

The  Commission  regrets  the  lack  of  support  for  the  provision  included  in  the 
proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating 
cross-border  enforcement  in  the  field  of  road  safety,  which  aimed  at  rendering  the 
establishment of correlation tables obligatory. 

The  Commission,  in  a  spirit  of  compromise  and  in  order  to  ensure  the  immediate 
adoption of that proposal, can accept the substitution of the obligatory provision on 
correlation  tables  included  in  the  text  with  a  relevant  recital  encouraging  Member 
States to follow this practice. 

However, the position followed by the Commission in this file shall not be considered 
as  a  precedent.  The  Commission  will  continue  its  efforts  with  a  view  to  finding 
together with  the  European  Parliament and the Council  an appropriate solution to 
this horizontal institutional issue". 

EN 

5 

   EN