COMMON POSITION (EC) No 22/98 adopted by the Council on 9 March 1998 with a view to adopting European Parliament and Council Decision No .../98/EC of ..., establishing an action programme to improve awareness of Community law within the legal professions (Robert Schuman project)
30. 4. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/25 COMMON POSITION (EC) No 22/98 adopted by the Council on 9 March 1998 with a view to adopting European Parliament and Council Decision No. /98/EC of. , establishing an action programme to improve awareness of Community law within the legal professions (Robert Schuman project) (98/C 135/03) THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 100a thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2), Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189b of the Treaty (3), (1) Whereas Declaration No 19 on the implementation of Community law annexed to the Final Act of the Treaty on European Union stresses that it is essential the Community that the measures taken by the different Member in States Community law being applied with the same effectiveness and rigour as in the application of their national law; functioning of the proper should result for (2) Whereas the completion of the internal market has required a considerable legislative effort involving, inter alia, the approximation of national laws with a view to creating an area without internal frontiers; (3) Whereas the effective and uniform application of the Community rules in question represents a new priority which smooth to is essential functioning of the internal market; the (4) Whereas those Community rules on the freedoms of the internal market which have direct effect may be invoked before any national court in accordance (1) OJ C 378, 13. 12. 1996, p. 17, and OJ C 368, 5. 12. 1997, p. 6. (2) OJ C 206, 7. 7. 1997, p. 63. (3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 24 October 1997 (OJ C 339, 10. 11. 1997, p. 410), Council Common Position of 9 March 1998 and Decision of the European Parliament of. (not yet published in the Official Journal). with procedures defined by national law; whereas citizens, consumers and undertakings must be able to rely on the application of those rules and to benefit from the rights and guarantees which they confer in the Member States as a whole; whereas legal certainty and the credibility of the internal is, more generally, market are at stake as confidence in the whole process of European integration; (5) Whereas citizens, consumers and undertakings will be unable to assert all their rights under the Community legal order before any national court unless those members of the legal professions most directly involved in applying Community law, namely lawyers, are sufficiently informed and trained to do so; judges, prosecutors and (6) Whereas the Commission communication to the Council of 22 December 1993 entitled ‘Making the most of the internal market: Strategic programme’ emphasises the importance, for individuals as well as for the smooth functioning of the internal market, of national courts’ being in a position to resolve a larger proportion of cases concerning the conformity of rules or conduct with Community law and, to that end, the need to improve knowledge of Community law within the legal professions; (7) Whereas in its Resolution of 13 February 1996 on the Commission’s 12th Annual Report on monitoring the application of Community law (4) the European Parliament asked the Commission to put forward a programme for the purpose of training and informing the legal professions in the field of Community law with a view to making the application of Community law by national courts more uniform and effective; (4) OJ C 65, 4. 3. 1996, p. 37. C 135/26 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 4. 98 (8) Whereas raising awareness of Community law among members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice in the Member States is likely to improve cooperation between national courts and the Court of Justice of the European Communities which is an inherent part of the Community legal order; Article 2 Objectives 1. The Robert Schuman project shall have as purpose: its (9) Whereas, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and by virtue of Article 127 of the Treaty, it is not for the European Community to assume in determining the organisation or content of training for members of the legal professions involved in the administration of judges, prosecutors and lawyers; the Member States justice, namely the role of (10) Whereas it is within the Community’s remit to propose the establishment of support arrangements designed to help Member States to remedy a lack of training and information wherever this may affect the correct application of Community law necessary for the smooth functioning of the internal market; (11) Whereas the objective of making members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers, more aware of Community law must from part of overall arrangements which, from checks on the correct transposition into national legislation of Community law to the penalties applicable in the event of that law being breached, are designed to ensure the effective and uniform application of the rules governing the internal market; (12) Whereas achieving this objective entails using specific resources adapted to the requirements and constraints of professional practice; whereas the creation of a specific instrument, the objective of which is to improve knowledge of Community law on the part of members of legal professions involved in the administration of justice in the Member States, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers, existing Community programmes and initiatives as far as the particular target group is concerned, complements HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 Establishment of the Robert Schuman project 1. This Decision establishes the programme known as the ‘Robert Schuman project’ for a period of three years. 2. By means of this financial support instrument, the Community intends to encourage and support initiatives designed to raise awareness of Community law among members of the in the legal professions administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers within the Member States. involved (a) to encourage the launch of training initiatives of a practical nature in Community law in the Member States (initial or continuing training) by bodies responsible legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers or those preparing to take part in the administration of justice; training members of the for (b) to encourage the development, in the Member States, of information resources (traditional or based on new in communication and Community law for members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers; information technology) (c) to support facilitate implementation of the above two forms of support, complement them or enhance their impact. initiatives likely to training 2. The Robert Schuman project shall support and complement information work on and Community law undertaken by Member States, while not encroaching on their responsibility for defining course content and organising vocational training. Article 3 Instrument of Community intervention 1. The Robert Schuman project shall be designed to provide financial support to initiatives launched in the Member States with a view to achieving the objectives referred to in Article 2. 2. Each of those objectives shall correspond to a specific aspect of ‘training’, the Robert Schuman project: ‘information’ or ‘accompanying initiatives’. Article 4 Financial provisions The financial framework for the implementation of this programme for a period of three years commencing on the date of entry into force of this Decision is hereby set at ECU 5,6 million. The annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the financial perspective. 30. 4. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/27 Article 5 (c) Adjustment to constraints of professional practice Eligibility conditions Institutions responsible in the Member States at local, 1. regional or national level or at Community level for: — the continuing vocational training of members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers, or — the initial vocational training of those preparing to take part in the administration of justice shall be considered eligible for financial support under the Robert Schuman project. 2. The institutions covered by paragraph 1 shall be: (a) the courts, (b) bar associations and equivalent professional bodies, (c) Ministries of Justice, high councils of the judiciary or similar bodies and bodies responsible at a high level for the training of the judiciary and judicial officers, (d) approved vocational schools or educational institutes responsible for the initial or continuing training of members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers, (e) the universities. Article 6 Project selection criteria 1. Eligible institutions shall apply for support under the Robert Schuman project by submitting a training, information or accompanying project to the competent Commission departments. 2. Projects shall be selected, and financial support awarded, on the basis of the following criteria: (a) Practical use The measures envisaged must enable the target groups to acquire knowledge adapted to, and immediately useful in, the day-to-day practice of their profession. (b) Accessibility The measures envisaged must be designed to raise awareness among the greatest possible number of members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers, and shall, in particular, benefit those who have not yet become acquainted with Community law. The way in which the measures envisaged are implemented must reflect the needs of professional practice (particularly in terms of timetabling and geographical proximity). (d) Cost-effectiveness financial management, When assessing projects submitted under the Robert Schuman project, the Commission shall work on the basis of the principles laid down by the relevant financial Regulations, in particular the principles of sound and cost-effectiveness. Costs entailed by the measures envisaged shall be reasonable having their objectives. regard Cost-effectiveness may be improved by partnerships involving a number of eligible institutions pooling their resources. economy to 3. The following optional assessment criteria shall also be taken into account: (a) the inter-professional dimension of measures (involvement of judges, prosecutors and lawyers in implementing them or as target groups), (b) the cross-border dimension of measures (involvement of nationals of more than one Member State in implementing them or as target groups). Article 7 Support arrangements 1. Financial support under the Robert Schuman project, which is designed to encourage, complement and support the work of the institutions referred to in Article 5, shall be provided in addition to local, regional or national funds and shall be used to achieve projects. Financial support thus awarded may not, therefore, entail the realisation of direct or indirect profits. 2. Financial support under the Robert Schuman project shall be awarded for one or two years. 3. So as to ensure continuity in the projects, the recipient of a Robert Schuman project grant shall undertake to continue the project without support from the Commission, as from the date on which the grant ceases, for a period equivalent to that for which the grant was made. Recipients shall undertake to repay all amounts disbursed if they fail to meet that obligation. Exceptionally, a derogation from the obligation to continue the work may be granted if the nature of a project prevents its continuation or if the recipient is confronted by circumstances, notably of an internal regulatory or financial nature, which prevent the project from being continued. C 135/28 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 4. 98 4. Financial the Robert support provided under Schuman project shall be awarded in accordance with the Commission’s rules governing grants. Compliance with those rules shall be monitored by the Community and the Court of Auditors of the European Communities. teaching on European integration at university level and the Grotius programme of incentives and exchanges for legal practitioners (joint action adopted on the basis of Article K. 3 of the Treaty on European Union). Article 8 Implementation 1. The Commission shall be responsible for carrying out this programme and shall adopt practical arrangements for its implementation. 2. A call for expressions of interest shall be published each year in the Official Journal of the European inform potential applicants of the Communities to Robert Schuman project’s objectives and the conditions governing the award of grants. Article 9 Consistency of Community action 1. The Commission shall be responsible, jointly with the Member States, for ensuring the overall consistency of this programme and other Community training or information initiatives 2. The Robert Schuman project shall complement action carried out under other Community programmes, in particular the Leonardo da Vinci programme for the implementation of a European Community vocational training policy, the Jean Monnet project to promote Article 10 Assessment and monitoring 1. The Commission shall be responsible for assessing and monitoring this programme on a periodic basis and shall keep the Member States regularly informed. 2. The Commission shall submit an assessment report on implementation of the programme to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions no later than two years after the programme enters into force. Article 11 Entry into force This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Done at. For the Parliament For the Council The President The President 30. 4. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/29 STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL’S REASONS I. INTRODUCTION On 22 November 1996 the Commission submitted a proposal for a Decision based on Article 100a of the EC Treaty. The Economical and Social Committee delivered its opinion on 23 April 1997. The European Parliament delivered its opinion on 19 October 1997. Further to the European Parliament’s opinion, the Commission submitted an amended proposal by letter dated 10 November 1997. The Council adopted its common position in accordance with Article 189b of the Treaty on 9 March 1998. II. COMMON POSITION In its opinion at first reading the European Parliament proposed a number of amendments, principally designed to specify the groups at which the measure was targeted and to allow for recipients to be exempted from the undertaking to continue projects after the period for which they had received financial support. The Commission’s amended proposal amendments, with an adjustment to the wording of Amendment 19. incorporated all the European Parliament’s III. AIM The aim of the Decision is to improve the awareness of Community law within the legal professions and thereby to encourage effective and uniform application of the Community rules on which the smooth functioning of the internal market relies. The Robert Schuman project is intended as a temporary programme offering financial support for measures implemented by institutions in the Member States providing training and information to members of the legal professions involved in the administration of justice, namely judges, prosecutors and lawyers. The Council has accordingly adopted nearly all of the text proposed by the Commission, clarifying certain aspects and simplifying others in line with the declared aim. IV. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMON POSITION 1. Recitals The Council has followed the Commission’s amended proposal, which was aligned on the European Parliament’s proposed amendments for recitals 11, 12 and part of recitals 5 and 8, and adopted the more precise wording suggested by the Parliament to designate the project’s target groups. The Council decided not to adopt the European Parliament’s proposed amendment to recital 6, since ‘the legal professions’ was the term used in the communication of 22 December 1993 and not a reference to the groups targeted by the Robert Schuman project. C 135/30 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 4. 98 The Council also decided against adopting the European Parliament’s proposed new recital 3a (amendment 1). It considered that the ideas contained in the proposed new recital were already to be found, albeit with a different wording, in recitals 3 and 6 (second part). A minor amendment proposed by the European Parliament to recital 10 was not adopted by the Council, which found the wording of the original proposal more appropriate. The European Parliament also proposed a new recital 10a (amendment 6), which highlighted the role of the legal professions in the application of Community law. The Council considered that the substance of this recital was already amply covered by recitals 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10, making an additional recital superfluous. 2. Establishment of the Robert Schuman Project (Article 1(1)) The Council decided to accept the European Parliament’s amendment regarding the project’s duration and to state clearly that the programme is established for three years. It chose not to add the proposed description of the aim of the project, which the Council considered belonged in the recitals. 3. Target groups of the project (Article 1(2), Article 2(1)(a) and (b), Article 4(1) and 2(d) and Article 5(2)(b)) The Council incorporated European Parliament amendments 10, 11, 12, 13 (second part), 15 and 17, which were designed to define the project’s target groups more clearly. 4. Reference to Article 1(1) (Article 4(1)) The Council decided not to add the reference to Article 1(1), because candidates were eligible for financial support under the Decision as a whole and not just under Article 1(1). 5. Universities as institutions eligible for financial support (Article 5(2)(e)) The Council accepted the European Parliament’s amendment making all universities eligible for financial support. 6. Inter-professional dimension of measures (Article 6(3)(a)) The Council accepted the spirit of the European Parliament amendment spelling out the scope of inter-professional measures but used what it felt was a clearer wording. 7. Support agreement (Article 7) The Council accepted the European Parliament’s amendment specifying that financial support is awarded for one or two years. It also accepted the amendment allowing recipients to be dispensed from the obligation to continue their project beyond the period covered by the grant but laid down the conditions for the derogation. 8. Financial provisions (Article 4) The Council did not incorporate the European Parliament’s proposed new Article 6(4a) or the reference to budgetary complementarity in Article 8 but accepted the Parliament’s idea that the Decision should incorporate a reference to financial provisions, which have been modelled on the Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 6 March 1995 on the incorporation of financial provisions into legislative acts. 30. 4. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/31 9. Consistency of Community action (Article 9) The Council decided not to make the European Parliament’s proposed addition to this Article, namely that the programme would operate in synergy with other Community programmes, on the grounds that this idea was already implicit in the original wording of Article 9(2). 10. Assessment and monitoring (Article 10) The Council slightly adjusted paragraph 1 of Article 10 in the interests of clarity and did not think it advisable to specify the content of the report, since it is for the Commission to decide on the scope and modalities of its report. V. CONCLUSION The common position incorporates most of the European Parliament’s amendments, sometimes with slightly different wording to make the text more readable, and keeps very close to the Commissions’s amended proposal, fully reflecting the European Parliament’s thinking and objectives. The Council’s efforts were mainly focused on producing a clear text that could be readily understood, while reflecting the European Parliament’s principal concerns, particularly with regard to the institutions eligible for financial support the project’s target groups and support arrangements