REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2017 Annual Report on the Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights
Date: 2018-06-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, European Convention on Human Rights, anti-discriminatory measure, application of EU law, fundamental rights, human rights, political rights, rights of aliens, rule of law, social rights

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.6.2018  COM(2018) 396 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2017 Annual Report on the Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights {SWD(2018) 304 final}  
 
 
1. Introduction 

The  European  Union  is  a  ‘union  of  values’  as  enshrined  in  Article  2  of  the  Treaty  on 
European Union and emphasised by European Commission President Juncker in his State of 
the  Union  address  on  13  September  2017.1  Three  pillars  anchor  the  European  Union: 
fundamental  rights,  democracy  and the  rule  of law.  The  EU  Charter  of  Fundamental Rights 
(‘the  Charter’)  must  guide  all  EU  action.  It  provides  a  modern  set  of  fundamental  rights  to 
which EU institutions and Member States, when implementing EU law, are legally bound. 

Fundamental  rights  apply  to  everyone.  Respecting  them  is  key  to  ensuring  that  the  EU  is  a 
place  where  people  can  prosper,  enjoy  their  freedoms  and  live  their  lives  without 
discrimination. 

This report shows that, in 2017, the structures and tools put in place to promote a culture of 
fundamental  rights  in  the  EU  and  ensure  that  the  Charter  is  a  reality  in  people’s  lives  have 
been relevant. The proclamation of the European Pillar of Social Rights in November 20172 
was a further step towards more equality and less exclusion. 

However, fundamental rights were also challenged in the EU in 2017. The independence of 
the  judiciary,  a  key  component  of  the  rule  of  law  and  a  pre-condition  for  the  effective 
enforcement and enjoyment of fundamental rights, was threatened. This led the Commission 
to  propose  to  the  Council,  for  the  first  time,  to  adopt  a  decision  under  Article  7(1)  of  the 
Treaty on European Union.3 Furthermore, the work of civil society organisations active in the 
area of fundamental rights was questioned and made more difficult. Women’s rights were also 
under attack, as discussed at the 2017 annual colloquium on fundamental rights.4 

It  has  never  been  more  important  to  highlight  that  respect  for  the  Charter  of  Fundamental 
Rights  is  not  an  option  but  an  obligation  for  EU  institutions  and  the  Member  States  when 
implementing EU law. 

1Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-3165_en.htm. 
2Available 
at: 
european-pillar-social-rights_en. 
3COM(2017)835 final, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-5367_en.htm. 
4See focus section of this report. 

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/deeper-and-fairer-economic-and-monetary-union/ 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
2. Applying the Charter in and by the EU 

2.1 Promoting and protecting fundamental rights 

Promoting social rights and fairness in the EU 

Building on the rights enshrined in the Charter, the  European Pillar of Social Rights5 was 
jointly signed and proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission 
on  17  November  2017.  The  Pillar  sets  out  20  key  principles  and  rights  to  support  fair  and 
well-functioning labour markets and welfare systems. The ‘Social Scoreboard’6 monitors the 
implementation of the Pillar and feeds into the European Semester, the EU’s yearly economic 
policy coordination cycle. 

It is for the EU Member States to deliver on the Pillar, working with social partners and civil 
society.  The  Union’s  institutions  help  set  the  frame.  For  instance,  in  2017,  the  Commission 
put  forward  a  proposal  for  a  Directive  on  Transparent  and  Predictable  Working 
Conditions in the  European Union.7 This  will complement  existing obligations and create 
new  minimum  standards  to  give  all  workers,  including  those  in  precarious  forms  of 
employment, more predictability and clarity as regards their working conditions (Article 31 of 
the Charter). 

Furthermore, on 26 April 2017 the Commission  adopted an  initiative to  support  work-life 
balance  for  working  parents and carers.8 It includes  legislative  measures to  ensure better 
work-life balance opportunities for men and women with caring responsibilities and a gender-
balanced  use  of  leave  and  flexible  work  arrangements.  It  also  envisages  policy  measures  to 
support  Member  States  in  providing  accessible,  affordable  and  quality  formal  care  services 
and to address economic disincentives for women (Articles 21, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 33 of the 
Charter). 

at: 

5Available 
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/deeper-and-fairer-economic-and-monetary-union/ 
european-pillar-social-rights_en. Data sources are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/european-pillar-
of-social-rights. 
6Available at: https://composite-indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu/social-scoreboard/. 
7Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on transparent and predictable working 
conditions in the European Union, COM(2017)0797 final. 
8Communication  from  the  Commission,  An  Initiative  to  Support  Work-Life  Balance  for  Working  Parents  and 
Carers, COM(2017)252 final. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
In the same vein, on 11 November 2017 the Commission adopted an action plan to combat 
the  gender  pay  gap.9  It  focusses  on  issues  such  as:  improving  the  application  of  the  equal 
pay  principle;  combating  segregation;  better  valuing  women’s  skills,  efforts  and 
responsibilities; uncovering inequalities and stereotypes; raising awareness of the gender pay 
gap and building stronger partnerships to tackle it. 

The guidelines for Member States’ employment policies10 were also revised to align with 
the Pillar. The employment guidelines are common priorities and targets for employment and 
social policies proposed by the Commission, agreed by national governments and adopted by 
the  Council.  They  are  the  basis  for  the  country  assessments  and  country-specific 
recommendations  under  the  European  Semester.  The  revision  put  the  focus  on  the  Pillar 
principles  related  to  minimum  income,  adequate  unemployment  benefits  and  active  support 
for employment. 

In  2017,  social  policies  continued  to  be  a  key  area  of  focus  for  the  European  Semester. 
Promoting social rights is a key part of structural reforms that aim to foster social justice and 
equality. In 2017, the Commission closely monitored Member States’ efforts to improve and 
increase women’s labour market participation and to combat discrimination of disadvantaged 
groups such as Roma, fight school segregation, and promote inclusive education reform. This 
showed that certain Member States are still facing challenges in including Roma children in 
high-quality  inclusive  mainstream  education  and  in  integrating  young  Roma  in  the  labour 
market.  In  particular,  the  Commission  proposed  that  the  Council  address  country-specific 
recommendations in this area to Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia. The Commission 
also closely monitored the Czech Republic’s work related to this area. 

Furthermore,  the  Commission  proposed  to  address  country-specific  recommendations  to 
Ireland on improving quality childcare and social infrastructure, including social housing, and 
to Spain on improving family support and quality childcare. 

In April 2017, the Commission adopted a Communication on the protection of children in 
migration,11 which sets out EU actions in this area and makes recommendations to Member 
States to ensure that children in the process of migration are better protected. As follow-up, 

9Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=607452. 
10Proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  on  guidelines  for  the  employment  policies  of  the  Member  States, 
COM(2017)677 final. 
11COM(2017)211 final. 

3 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
the  Council  adopted  Conclusions  on  8  June  2017.12  The  Communication  addresses  faster 
identification  and  immediate  protection  of  children,  quicker  family  tracing  and  status 
determination, implementation of procedural safeguards including effective guardianship for 
unaccompanied  children,  child-appropriate  reception  and  effective  integration.  Guardianship 
is  a  key  procedural  safeguard  for  children’s  best  interests  and  wellbeing.  The  Commission 
took steps to establish a European Network on Guardianship to facilitate cooperation between 
relevant national authorities and exchange good practices on guardianship. 

On 4 December 2017, the Commission also adopted a Communication on the follow-up to 
the  EU  strategy  towards  the  eradication  of  trafficking  in  human  beings13,  ensuring  a 
fundamental rights based, gender specific and child sensitive approach. 

Promoting democracy and fundamental rights through healthy public debate and a vibrant 
civil society 

In  2017,  the  Commission  launched  an  initiative  on  fake  news  and  the  spread  of 
disinformation  online,  as  announced  by  President  Juncker.14  This  initiative,  which  also 
follows-up  on  the  European  Parliament’s  Resolution  of  15  June  2017,15  aims  to  identify 
appropriate ways of limiting the impact of the dissemination of fake content and to foster a 
healthy public debate. The Commission established a High Level Expert Group and launched 
wide-ranging  consultations.16  In  October  2017,  the  Council  addressed  these  issues  in  its  3rd 
annual  rule  of  law  dialogue,  which  focused  on  media  pluralism  and  the  rule  of  law  in  the 
digital age.17 

The work of human rights defenders, including civil society organisations active in the field 
of fundamental rights and democracy, was made particularly difficult in 2017.18 Their role is 

12Available at: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10085-2017-INIT/en/pdf. 
13COM(2017)728,  available  at:  https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/news/trafficking-human-beings-commission-
adopts-new-communication-and-commits-new-set-priorities_en. 
14See  State  of  the  Union  Address  2017,  available  at:  http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-
3165_en.htm. 
15Available 
0272+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN. 
16On  25  April  2018,  the  Commission  published  its  Communication  on  “Tackling  online  disinformation:  a 
European Approach” (reference not yet available). 
17Available at: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12671-2017-INIT/en/pdf. 
18See the report of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights available at: 
http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2018/challenges-facing-civil-society-orgs-human-rights-eu; See the Opinion 
of the European Economic and Social Committee available at: http://www.european-net.org/2017/11/eesc-

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA-2017-

at: 

4 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
 
 
key in making fundamental rights and values a reality for everyone and they should be able to 
carry out their work in a safe and supportive environment. To further support rights defenders, 
in  December  2017,  as  part  of  the  EU  Budget  2018,  the  European  Parliament  adopted  a 
preparatory  action  on  an  ‘EU  fund  for  financial  support  for  litigating  cases  relating  to 
violations of democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights’. 

adopts-opinion-financing-civil-society-organisations/; See the report of the Council of Europe available at: 
https://rm.coe.int/...on...impact-of-current-national-legislation-policies.../168073e81e. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                          
 
Promoting an EU free from racism, discrimination and violence 

The second EU Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS II), published by the EU 
Agency for Fundamental Rights in December 2017, showed continued intolerance, violence 
and hatred across the EU.19 These concerns were at the centre of the work of the  high-level 
group on combating racism, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance in 2017.20 

Cooperation  with  IT  companies,  national  authorities  and  civil  society  organisations  was 
strengthened  to  ensure  that  online  illegal  hate  speech  is  quickly  identified  and  taken  down. 
The monitoring of the implementation of the Code of conduct on countering illegal hate 
speech online showed that IT companies had made remarkable progress in this area.21 On 28 
September  2017,  the  Commission  adopted  a  Communication  on  tackling  illegal  content 
online22 to implement more good practices that prevent, detect, remove and disable access to 
illegal  content.  At  the  same  time,  it  introduced  safeguards  to  avoid  over-removal,  ensure 
transparency and protect the freedom of expression.23 

The high-level group also compiled  guiding principles on hate crime for law enforcement 
and criminal justice authorities24 and on access to justice, protection and support for victims 
of hate crime.25 It further developed guidance on improving the recording of hate crime by 
law enforcement authorities,26 which is now being tested in several Member States. 

In May 2017, Muslim and Jewish organisations came together for a joint day of action against 
Antisemitism  and  anti-Muslim  hatred  and  discrimination  and  addressed  specific 
challenges, such as the security needs of Jewish communities and stereotypes of Muslims in 
the media.27 The findings on Muslims published by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights 

19Available at: http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2017/eumidis-ii-main-results. 
20Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?&item_id=51025. 
21Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=49286;  http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/ 
just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=71674.  Progress  was  confirmed  in  the  3rd  monitoring  published  on  19  January 
http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=612086. 
22Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and 
Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  Tackling  Illegal  Content  Online  Towards  An  Enhanced 
Responsibility of Online Platforms COM(2017)555 final. 
23On  1  March  2018,  the  Communication  was  followed  up  by  a  Recommendation  on  measures  to  effectively 
tackle illegal content online, C(2018)1177 final. 
24Available at:  http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=43050. 
25Available at:  http://http//ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=48874. 
26Available at:  http://fra.europa.eu/en/news/2017/improving-recording-hate-crime-law-enforcement-authorities. 
27Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=50144. 

6 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
on 21 September28 and its 2017 overview of Antisemitism showed that there are worrying and 
pressing concerns to be addressed.29 

On  30  August  2017,30  the  Commission  published  a  midterm  review  of  the  EU  Framework 
for  national  Roma  integration  strategies  up  to  2020.  The  review  shows  how  European 
legal,  policy  and  funding  instruments31  have  been  mobilised  to  fight  discrimination  and 
promote  Roma  inclusion.  There  are  signs  of  progress  in  education,  although  segregation  is 
still present and in some cases has even increased. The rate of Roma youth not in education, 
employment  or  training  increased  as  well.  In  2017,  the  Commission  launched  an  in-depth 
evaluation and public consultation on this Framework, to feed reflections on post-2020 policy 
options. 

In  2017,  the  Commission  continued  to  implement  the  list  of  actions  to  advance  LGBTI 
equality.32  Through  the  Rights,  Equality  and  Citizenship  programme,  it  supported  projects 
that raise awareness and combat discrimination and intolerance against LGBTI people. 

Promoting access to justice and effective remedy 

Promoting access to justice and the right to effective redress under Article 47 of the Charter is 
a precondition for the effective enjoyment of all rights under EU law, including the Charter. 
The  Commission  helps  Member  States  fulfil  their  obligation  to  ensure  effective  legal 
protection in the fields covered by EU law.33 

Following  the  adoption  of  the  Communication  on  EU  law:  Better  results  through  better 
application,34  in  2017,  the  Commission  assisted  Member  States  in  their  efforts  to  step-up 
enforcement of EU law for the benefit of individuals and businesses. It organised high-level 
dialogues and exchanges of best practice with national authorities and courts. It also worked 
with  the  European  Network  of  Ombudsmen  and  helped  Member  States  raise  awareness  on 

28Available at: http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2017/eumidis-ii-muslims-selected-findings. 
29Available  at:  http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2017/antisemitism-overview-2006-2016.  The  Agency  will 
publish in 2018 its second survey on experiences of discrimination and hate crime against Jews. 
30Information from the 2011 Roma pilot project and the EU-MIDIS II survey carried out by the EU Agency for 
Fundamental Rights fed into this exercise. 
31Racial Equality Directive, European Semester, European Structural and Investment Funds. 
32Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=615032. 
33Article 19(1) of the Treaty on the European Union. 
34Communication from the Commission EU law: Better results through better application (2017/C 18/02). 

7 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
citizens’ rights under EU law and on the problem-solving tools available at national and EU 
level. 

Improving  the  quality,  independence  and  efficiency  of  national  justice  systems  also 
remained  a  key  priority  in  the  context  of  the  European  Semester,  where  the  Commission 
addressed  country-specific  recommendations  to  five  Member  States  to  help  them  improve 
their  justice  systems.35  The  Commission  also  pursued  cases  in  which  national  law  does  not 
provide  effective redress  for  a  breach  of  EU  law  or  prevents  national  judicial  systems  from 
ensuring that EU law is applied effectively in accordance with the rule of law and Article 47 
of the Charter. 

In environmental matters, on 28 April 2017 the Commission adopted a  Notice on access to 
justice,36  which  clarifies  how  individuals  and  associations  can  challenge  public  authority 
decisions,  acts  and  omissions  related  to  EU  environmental  law  before  national  courts.  The 
Notice helps citizens decide whether to bring a case before national courts or not. It advises 
national courts on the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) cases that they should 
take into account when faced with questions related to access to justice. 

2.2. Ensuring the respect of fundamental rights 

EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies must comply with the Charter in all their actions. 
Any case of non-compliance can be brought before the CJEU. The Commission is committed 
to  ensuring  that  fundamental  rights  are  fully  respected  in  all  its  legislative  and  policy 
proposals. 

On  12  December  2017,  the  Commission  adopted  proposals  on  a  framework  for 
interoperability  between  EU  information  systems37  to  close  information  gaps  and  better 

35Croatia,  Italy,  Cyprus,  Slovakia  and  Portugal.  See:  https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2017-european-
semester-country-specific-recommendations-commission-recommendations_en. 
36Available at:  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/pdf/notice_accesstojustice.pdf. 
37Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  establishing  a  framework  for 
interoperability  between  EU  information  systems  (borders  and  visa)  and  amending  Council  Decision 
2004/512/EC, Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, Council Decision 2008/633/JHA, Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and 
https://ec.europa.eu/home-
Regulation 
affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-security/20171212_proposal_regulation_on 
_establishing_framework_for_interoperability_between_eu_information_systems_borders_and_visa_en.pdf  and 
Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  establishing  a  framework  for 

2017/2226,  COM(2017)793 

available 

final, 

(EU) 

at: 

8 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
 
 
protect  EU  citizens.  The  aim  is  to  improve  the  efficiency  and  effectiveness  of  EU-wide 
information-sharing  tools  by  making  it  possible  for  them  to  work  together  in  a  better  way. 
Authorised  users  (such  as  police  officers,  migration  officials  and  border  guards)  will  have 
faster, seamless and more systematic access to the information they need to do their jobs, in 
full  compliance  with  fundamental  rights.  The  Commission’s  overall  evaluation  of  the 
instruments will include an examination of their impact on fundamental rights. 

In  March  2017,  the  Commission’s  evaluation  report38  on  the  application  of  EU  rules  on 
countering  migrant  smuggling39  addressed  concerns  about  the  criminalisation  of  actions 
carried out by civil society organisations or individuals providing humanitarian assistance to 
irregular migrants. This report reflects the views of a range of stakeholders and acknowledges 
that the optional nature of EU rules allowing Member States not to criminalise the facilitation 
of irregular entry when it is conducted on humanitarian grounds may result in a lack of clarity 
and legal certainty. The Commission is currently engaging with relevant stakeholders on the 
implementation of this specific aspect of the legal framework. 

Following  the  adoption  of  the  Directive  on  combating  terrorism40  in  March  2017,  the 
Commission  engaged  with  civil  society  to  better  understand  concerns  on  the  impact  of 
counter-terrorism  measures  on  fundamental  rights.  It  is  helping  Member  States  to  correctly 
transpose  and  implement  the  new  Directive,  including  as  regards  fundamental  rights.  These 
exchanges will feed into the Commission’s assessment of the Directive, including its impact 
on fundamental rights and freedoms (in particular non-discrimination, the rule of law and the 
level of protection and assistance provided to victims of terrorism).41 

at:  https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/10102/2017/EN/SWD-2017-120-F1-EN-MAIN-

interoperability  between  EU  information  systems  (police  and  judicial  cooperation,  asylum  and  migration), 
COM(2017) 794 final, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2017/EN/COM-2017-794-F1-
EN-MAIN-PART-1.PDF. 
38Available 
PART-1.PDF. 
39Council  Directive  2002/90/EC  defining  the  facilitation  of  unauthorised  entry,  transit  and  residence  (the 
‘Directive’) OJ L 328, 5.12.2002, p. 17; and Council Framework Decision 2002/946/JHA on the strengthening 
of the penal framework to prevent the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence4 (the ‘Framework 
Decision’) OJ L 328, 5.12.2002, p. 1. 
40Directive  (EU)  2017/541  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  March  2017  on  combating 
terrorism  and  replacing  Council  Framework  Decision  2002/475/JHA  and  amending  Council  Decision 
2005/671/JHA. 
41Report to be submitted to the Parliament and Council by 2021. 

9 

 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                          
 
2.3. Raising awareness of the Charter 

To fully enjoy their fundamental rights, people need to know what these are and who to turn 
to  in  the  event  of  violations.  As  follow-up  to  the  Commission’s  2016  Charter  Report,  the 
Council  adopted  conclusions  on  12  October  2017,42  in  which  it  underlined  the  need  to 
increase  awareness  of  the  Charter  and  of  digital  tools  such  as  e-Justice.  The  Commission 
improved the e-Justice Portal in 2017.43 It will include a section on fundamental rights with 
user-friendly checklists and guidance on the Charter and its scope of application. 

The  Commission  also  continued  to  support  training  for  legal  professionals  on  the 
application of the Charter under the Justice Programme.44 

2.4 Court of Justice scrutiny of EU institutions 

In its Opinion 1/15 on the Draft agreement between Canada and the European Union on 
the transfer of passenger name record data from the European Union to Canada, adopted 
on  26  July  2017,  the  CJEU  found  that  several  provisions  of  the  proposed  agreement  were 
incompatible with the right to respect of private life (Article 7) and protection of personal data 
(Article  8).  The  Court  expressed  concerns  as  to  the  proportionality,  clarity  and  precision  of 
the rules set out in the agreement and the lack of justification for the transfer, processing and 
retention of sensitive data. The Commission is carefully assessing the most appropriate way to 
address the concerns raised by the Court, to ensure the security of EU citizens in full respect 
of fundamental rights, in particular the right to data protection.45 

In the Aisha Muammer Mohamed El-Qaddafi v Council case,46 the General Court annulled 
the Council Decision47 and Regulation48 in so far as it maintained the name of Ms Muammer 
Mohamed El-Qaddafi on the list of people to whom restrictive measures applied in view of 
the  situation  in  Libya.49  The  measures  related  to  the  ban  on  entry  and  transit  on  Libyan 

42Available at: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12913-2017-INIT/en/pdf. 
43Available at: https://beta.e-justice.europa.eu/?action=home&plang=en. 
442017 Annual Work Programme is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/programmes-2014-2020/files/ 
awp_2017/2017_justice_work_programme_annex_en.pdf. 
45Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-17-2105_en.htm. 
46T-681/14. 
472014/380/CFSP of 23 June 2014 amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP. 
48No 689/2014 of 23 June 2014 implementing Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) No 204/2011. 
49Annexes I and III to Council Decision 2011/137/CFSP of 28 February 2011 Annex II to Council Regulation 
(EU) No 204/2011 of 2 March 2011. 

10 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
territory and provided that funds and financial assets owned or controlled by the people listed 
are  to  be  frozen.  The  General  Court  ruled  that  it  was  not  possible  to  conclude  from  the 
statement  of  reasons  for  the  measures  why  the  original  grounds  for  having  the  applicant’s 
name on the list remained relevant despite the evolution of the situation in Libya. Therefore, it 
found  that  the  Council  infringed  its  obligation  to  state  the  actual  and  specific  reasons  for 
maintaining such restrictive measures  - a corollary to the respect for the applicant’s right of 
defence, which also derives from Articles 41, 47 and 48(2) of the Charter. 

3. Charter application in and by Member States 

3.1 Developments in fundamental rights and the rule of law 

In  2017,  the  Commission  issued  a  reasoned  opinion  on  the  application  by  Hungary  of  EU 
asylum  and  migration  law  interpreted  in  light  of  several  Charter  provisions,  including  the 
right to asylum, the right to liberty and security, and the right to an effective remedy.50 

It also referred to the CJEU three cases that raised issues on the respect of fundamental rights 
under  the  Charter.  The  first  concerned  the  compatibility  of  reporting  and  transparency 
obligations  for  foreign-funded  civil  society  organisations  with  the  right  to  freedom  of 
association, the right to respect for private life and the right to the protection of personal data, 
read  in  conjunction  with  Treaty  obligations  on  the  free  movement  of  capital.51  The  second 
case touched upon the right of academic freedom, the right to education and the freedom to 
conduct a business, in relation to rules affecting the freedom for higher education institutions 
to  provide  services  and  establish  themselves  anywhere  in  the  EU  and  to  the  EU’s  legal 
obligations  under  international  trade  law.52  The  third  case  concerned  the  compatibility  of 
national rules governing  the  prolongation  of mandates of judges of ordinary courts with the 
principle  of  judicial  independence,  in  particular  with  the  obligation  for  Member  States  to 
provide  remedies  sufficient  to  ensure  effective  legal  protection  in  the  fields  covered  by  EU 
law as provided by Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, read in connection with 
the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial as enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter. 

The  Charter  applies  to  Member  States  only  when  they  are  implementing  EU  law. 
Infringement  procedures  based  on  the  Charter  can  therefore  only  be  triggered  when  a 

50Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-5023_en.htm. 
51Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-5003_en.htm. 
52Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-5004_en.htm. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
sufficient  link  to  EU  law  is  established.  However,  even  when  acting  outside  the 
implementation of the EU law, Member States are obliged to respect the values on which the 
EU is founded. In particular, respect for the rule of law is a precondition for the protection of 
fundamental  rights.  As  regards  the  situation  in  Poland,  in  2016  and  2017  the  Commission 
issued  four  Recommendations  under  its  Rule  of  Law  Framework53  concerning  several  laws 
limiting  the  independence  of  the  judiciary  and  the  separation  of  powers  in  Poland  and 
affecting  the  entire  structure  of  the  Polish  justice  system,  in  particular  the  Constitutional 
Tribunal, the Supreme  Court,  ordinary courts  and the  National  Council for the Judiciary. In 
December 2017, the Commission concluded that there is a clear risk of a serious breach of the 
rule of law in Poland and proposed to the Council to adopt a decision under Article 7(1) of the 
Treaty  on  European  Union.54  Simultaneously, 
the  Commission  adopted  a  fourth 
Recommendation under its Rule of Law Framework, inviting the Polish authorities to  solve 
the problems identified within three months. The Commission also decided to refer Poland to 
the CJEU for breaches of EU law by the law on ordinary courts organisation.  

3.2 Court of Justice guidance to Member States 

In the Achbita55 and Bougnaoui56 cases, the CJEU clarified  the  interpretation of provisions 
under  the  Employment  Equality  Directive  (2000/78/EC)  in  the  light  of  the  balance  to  be 
struck  between  the  freedom  of  religion  or  belief  (Article  10),  the  freedom  to  conduct  a 
business  (Article  16),  and  the  principle  of  non-discrimination  (Article  21).  Both  cases 
concerned the prohibition of wearing the Islamic headscarf in the private workplace. In 
the Achbita case, the Court held that an internal policy relating to the visible wearing of any 
political, philosophical or religious signs should be assessed having regard to the employer’s 
freedom to conduct a business. Accordingly, a policy of political, philosophical and religious 
neutrality may constitute a legitimate objective that justifies different treatment, if the means 
of  achieving  the  aim  are  appropriate  and  necessary,  in  line  with  relevant  case  law  of  the 
European Court of Human Rights.57 In the Bougnaoui case, the Court further clarified that, in 

53In 2014, the Commission introduced a framework aiming to address situations of emerging systemic threats to 
the  rule  of  law  which  cannot  be  effectively  tackled  by  safeguards  at  national  level  or  existing  instruments  (in 
particular infringement procedures) at EU level. Communication entitled ‘A new EU Framework to Strengthen 
the Rule of Law’, COM(2014)158 final. 
54Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-5367_en.htm. 
55C-157/15. 
56C-188/15. 
57The Court of Justice referred, in particular, to the ECtHR judgment of 15 January 2013 in case 48420/10, 
36516/10, 51671/10 et al., Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom. 

12 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
the absence of such a policy, the willingness of an employer to take account of a customer’s 
wish  to  no  longer  benefit  from  the  employer’s  services  provided  by  a  worker  wearing  an 
Islamic headscarf may not be considered a genuine and determining occupational requirement 
that could rule out discrimination within the meaning of the Employment Equality Directive. 

In the M.A.S. and M.B. cases,58 the Court provided further clarification on the obligation for 
national  courts  to  disapply  national  rules  on  limitation  periods  if  these  result  in  a  situation 
where  people  charged  with  serious  value  added  tax  (VAT)  fraud  may  escape  conviction.59 
The Court held that the obligation to combat fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the 
EU’s  financial  interests  may  never  run  counter  to  the  Charter  principle  that  offences  and 
penalties  must  be  defined  by  law,  which  requires  that  rules  of  criminal  law  are  precisely 
determined and cannot be retroactive. 

In  the  Soufiane  El  Hassani  v.  Minister  Spraw  Zagranicznych  case,60  the  Court  held  that 
Article  47  of  the  Charter  (right  to  an  effective  remedy)  requires  the  Member  States  to 
guarantee, at a certain stage of the proceedings, the possibility to bring the case concerning a 
final decision refusing a visa before a court. 

3.3. National case law quoting the Charter 

National judges play a key role in upholding fundamental rights and the rule of law. The EU 
Agency for Fundamental Rights found that national courts continued referring to the Charter 
for guidance and inspiration in 2017, even in a substantial number of cases that fell outside 
the scope of EU law.61 

The  Charter  for  instance  served  as  a  parameter  for  assessing  Member  States’  legislation 
implementing  EU  law  in  two  cases  related  to  data  protection.  The  Finnish  Administrative 
Court assessed the compatibility of the Personal Data Act of 1999 with the Charter in a case 
concerning the storage of fingerprint data in the passport register. It found that the restrictions 
of  the  right  to  respect  for  private  life  and  to  the  protection  of  personal  data  are  precise  and 
defined  in  sufficient  detail  and  therefore  not  contrary  to  the  Charter.62  The  Higher 
the  German 
Administrative  Court 

in  Germany  assessed 

the  compatibility  of 

58C-42/17. 
59See judgment in Case C‑ 105/14, Taricco. 
60C-403/16. 
61EU Agency for Fundamental Rights’ 2017 Annual Report, to be published in May 2018. 
62Finland, Supreme Administrative Court, case 3872/2017, 15 August 2017. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
Telecommunication Act, implementing the e-Privacy Directive 2002/58/EC, with the Charter. 
The  Court  found  that  the  limitation  of  the  freedom  to  conduct  a  business  (Article  16)  was 
unjustified and hence incompatible with the Charter.63 

Outside the scope of the application of EU law, the courts used the Charter to strengthen the 
protection  provided  by  national  constitutions.  In  particular,  the  Constitutional  Court  of 
Croatia, in a case concerning the violation of the right to dignity (Article 1) of a twelve year-
old  boy  due  to  a  body  check  performed  by  a  security  guard,  clarified  that  by  joining  the 
European  Union,  the  Republic  of  Croatia  accepted  the  contents  of  the  Charter,  including 
chapter  I  on  Dignity.  Human  dignity  therefore  became  a  component  of  the  human  rights 
catalogue of the Croatian Constitution.64 In Bulgaria, the Constitutional Court referred to the 
Charter  in  the  context  of  a  constitutional  review  of  a  provision  in  the  Judiciary  Act,  which 
prohibits  judges  and  prosecutors  from  resigning  when  a  disciplinary  proceeding  is  still 
pending. The Court concluded that the provision violated the Bulgarian Constitution, and also 
referred to Article 15 of the Charter on the right to engage in work ‘in accordance to which 
everyone  has  the  right  to  engage  in  work  and  to  pursue  a  freely  chosen  or  accepted 
occupation’.65 

4. Focus section: 2017 Annual Colloquium on Fundamental Rights 
‘Women’s rights under attack’ 

The  Annual  Colloquium  is  a  unique  space  for  dialogue  between  policy  makers  and  civil 
society, aiming to strengthen cooperation and engagement for the protection and promotion of 
fundamental rights in the EU. The third Annual Colloquium held on 20-21 November 2017 
explored the topic of ‘women’s rights in turbulent times’.66 

Participants discussed the risk of normalising misogyny in society and its impact on women’s 
fundamental  rights  in  all  spheres  of  life.  They  underlined  that,  although  threats  to  women’s 
rights  and  to  gender  equality  have  been  very  visible  in  public  discourse  recently,  so  have 
responses (e.g. Women’s Marches and the #metoo movement online). The role of grassroots 
actors in defending women’s rights and the role of men in the women’s rights movement were 
also stressed. 

63Germany, Higher Administrative Court North Rhine-Westphalia, case 13 B 238/17, 22 June 2017. 
64Croatia, Constitutional Court, case U-III-1095/2014, 21 September 2017. 
65Bulgaria, Constitutional Court, case 6/2016, 31 January 2017. 
66Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/item-detail.cfm?item_id=115277. 

14 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
tackled  from  an  early  age 

A  second  area  of  discussion  was  the  key  obstacles  to  gender  equality  in  economic 
empowerment  and  political  participation.  Participants  highlighted  the  fact  that  gender 
to  effectively  address  women’s 
stereotypes  must  be 
underrepresentation  in  work,  decision-making  and  politics.  National  and  European  political 
parties  were  asked  to  commit  to  consistently  include  women  on  party  lists,  for  example 
through greater transparency in candidate selection and women’s caucuses. Participants also 
called for more pay transparency and for horizontal and vertical labour market segregation to 
be addressed. 

Participants also considered the ‘culture of violence’ in society and the links between violence 
against women and other forms of violence, including in the context of populist and extremist 
movements.  They  emphasised  the  need  to  shift  the  fear  and  shame  away  from  victims  of 
gender-based violence to perpetrators, and to bring about a cultural change, so that violence 
and harassment would be considered unacceptable. 

The  EU’s  accession  to  the  Council  of  Europe’s  Convention  on  preventing  and  combating 
violence  against  women  and  domestic  violence  (the  Istanbul  Convention)67  was  seen  as  a 
strong  signal.  Work  is  now  being  carried  out  to  ensure  swift  EU  ratification.  At  the  end  of 
2017, all EU Member States had signed the Istanbul Convention and 17 Member States68 had 
ratified it. 

Throughout  the  sessions,  participants  emphasised  that  different  grounds  for  discrimination 
(such as gender, race, immigration status and disability) intersect, which should be considered 
by policy makers. The debate was informed by the results of a special Eurobarometer survey 
on gender equality.69 

Colloquium conclusions were published on 8 March 2018.70 The Commission committed to a 
number of actions ranging from putting women’s rights and gender equality on the agenda at 
the  highest  political  level,  for  instance  during  every  meeting  of  the  Commission’s  Project 
Team on Sustainable Development, to funding grassroots projects under the Rights, Equality 
and Citizenship programme. 

67Available at: https://www.coe.int/fr/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e. 
68BE, DK, DE, EE, ES, FR, IT, CY, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SI, FI, SE. 
69Available 
at: 
ments/SPECIAL/surveyKy/2154. 
70Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=50219. 

http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/instru 

15 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
5. Conclusion 

This year, marking the 70th Anniversary of the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights, 
the  Commission  will  pursue  efforts  to  protect  and  promote  fundamental  rights.  It  is 
determined,  including  in  the  context  of  the  future  financial  framework  for  the  Union,  to 
further support common values. 

It  will  focus  its  2018  fundamental  rights  colloquium  on  “Democracy”,  an  opportunity  to 
reaffirm  one  of  the  EU’s  key  values  in  the  run-up  to  the  European  elections.  A  broad 
participation  and  representation,  sound  and  transparent  information,  including  in  the  digital 
world,  and  a  free  and  vibrant  civil  society  are  the  key  ingredients  for  inclusive  and  healthy 
democratic societies. These questions will be at the heart of the colloquium discussions.  

16