Monday 10 July 2006, by European Commission
All the versions of this article:
Introduction
Private individuals should be able to enjoy effective judicial protection of the rights that they derive from Community law [1]. For this purpose, the Treaty establishes a full system of forms of action and procedures, in which close cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts, organised by the preliminary ruling procedure (Article 234 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (the «EC Treaty»)), is an essential component.
The Amsterdam Treaty sets the objective of progressively establishing an area of freedom, security and justice. For this purpose, some of the matters previously covered by Title VI of the Treaty on European Union (the «third pillar») were brought within the EC Treaty under certain conditions. Meanwhile, establishing this area has become a Union priority thanks to the political impetus given in particular by the European Council in 1999 (Tampere) and 2004 (Hague programme) and the sound cooperation of all the institutions.
In the development of this area of freedom, security and justice, respect for fundamental rights, and in particular effective judicial protection for everybody, must occupy an essential place. The second indent of Article 67(2) of the EC Treaty accordingly requires the Council, at the end of the transitional period of five years following the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, to take a decision «with a view to adapting the provisions concerning the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice» (i.e. Article 68 of the Treaty).
But the Commission notes that the transitional period expired on 1 May 2004 and that the Council has not launched work to fulfil this legal obligation [2].
The purpose of this communication is to contribute to the adaptation of the special provisions of Article 68 of the EC Treaty concerning the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice in the fields covered by Title IV. In the Commission’s opinion, this adaptation should consist of aligning that jurisdiction on the general scheme of the Treaty. A draft Council Decision to that end is attached.
For the reasons explained below, the Commission considers that the best way of adapting the provisions of Title IV relating to the Court is to bring them into line with the standard rules on judicial protection of the Treaty, in all fields covered by Title IV. The specific provisions of Article 68 of the EC Treaty should therefore cease to apply. This is necessary, first of all, for Article 68(1), which prohibits national courts other than those of final instance from applying to the Court for preliminary rulings, whereas Article 234, which establishes the procedure for cooperation with the courts of the Member States, allows any national court to do so. The same applies to the procedure provided for in Article 68(3) [3], which loses its raison d’être once the standard preliminary ruling procedure is established. Lastly, there is no longer any reason for excluding the jurisdiction of the Court for certain measures, as provided for in Article 68(2) [4].
The sections below develop the arguments on which the Commission’s position is based. In particular, alignment of the rules concerning the jurisdiction of the Court in Title IV on the ordinary law will:
ensure the uniform application and interpretation of Community law in this area as in all others (infra, item a);
make it possible to strengthen judicial protection, in fields that are particularly sensitive in terms of fundamental rights (infra, item b);
remedy a paradoxical retrograde step in judicial protection as a result of the Amsterdam Treaty in civil matters covered by Article 65 of the EC Treaty (infra, item c); and
enable the Community judicial system to perform normally without any fear of operating problems in this area (infra, item d).
Download at .doc format
[1] See, in particular, the judgments of the Court of Justice in Case 294/83 Greens v Parliament [1983] ECR 1339, para 23; Case 222/84 Johnston [1986] ECR 1651, para 18; Case C-50/00 P Unión de pequeños agricultores [2002] ECR I-6677, paras 38-40.
[2] The Council decided, on the basis of the second indent of Article 67(2) of the EC Treaty to extend the application of the codecision procedure; see Decision of 22 December 2004 (2004/927/EC), OJ L 396, 31.12.2004, p. 45. The Commission had the following statement entered in the Council minutes: «The Commission would wish to recall that Article 67(2) foresees a decision of the Council not only providing for the areas which should be governed by codecision but also adapting the provisions relating to the powers of the Court of Justice. The passage to codecision for a majority of the domains of Title IV as presented in this present decision contributes in no small measure to increasing the democratic legitimacy of instruments adopted under this title and the Commission can welcome the decision to that extent. That being so, it is unacceptable that the decision does not provide for any adaptation of the competences of the Court, thus perpetuating a situation where access to the Court of Justice remains limited. The Commission is absolutely convinced that, in this area which so closely touches on the rights of individuals, an increased access to justice is equally essential to enhance legitimacy.» The European Parliament took the same position in the Bourlanges Report adopted on 16 December 2004.
[3] «The Council, the Commission or a Member State may request the Court of Justice to give a ruling on a question of interpretation of this title or of acts of the institutions of the Community based on this title...».
[4] «... the Court of Justice shall not have jurisdiction to rule on any measure or decision taken pursuant to Article 62(1) relating to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.»