WRITTEN QUESTION No. 479/99 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO Incorporation of Directive 93/16 into Spanish law
C 341/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 29. 11. 1999 (1999/C 341/174) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0479/99 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission Subject: Incorporation of Directive 93/16 into Spanish law (5 March 1999) The European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions has deemed admissible Petition No 605/98 on the inadequate incorporation into Spanish law of Directive (EEC) 93/16 (1), which has the effect of putting certain professional groups at a disadvantage when they seek recognition of their qualifications. Can the Commission say whether or not their complaint is justified? Has Directive 93/16 been properly incorporated in its entirety into Spanish national law? If it has not, in what respects is the incorporation deficient, what attitude may the Spanish Government be expected to adopt and what procedures will be applied by the Community authorities if the situation needs to be remedied? (1) OJ L 165, 7. 7. 1993, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (27 April 1999) Directive 93/16/EEC, which is referred to by the Honourable Member, provides for the automatic recognition of a number of qualifications in specialised medicine mentioned specifically by Article 5 or Article 7 of the Directive. Medical specialisations which are not listed in Directive 93/16/EEC must be examined on an individual basis. In their examination, the authorities of the host Member State must compare the training undergone in the Member State of origin or provenance with their own training requirements. If necessary, additional training can be required under Article 8 of Directive 93/16/EEC. The Commission confirms that a number of doctors holding specialist qualifications awarded in a Member State other than Spain have had severe difficulties in having their qualifications recognised by the Spanish authorities. Some doctors are still awaiting a decision. The Commission has initiated infringement proceedings against Spain as provided for in Article 169 of the EC Treaty for incorrect transposition of Article 8 and failure to transpose Article 18 of Directive 93/16/EEC. Having found the reply of Spain to the reasoned opinion delivered during these proceedings to be unsatisfactory, the Commission has decided to bring the matter before the Court of Justice. (1999/C 341/175) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0481/99 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (5 March 1999) Subject: Automatic deportation of migrant workers The Baden-Württemberg Minister of Justice, Mr Goll, and in particular Mr Knapp, the judge empowered to represent him, have publicly stated that they have been applying an ‘automatic deportation’ system to migrant workers and all other foreign nationals accused of infringing Article 56 of the Treaty, which admittedly allows deportation on grounds of public policy or public security, but only in cases where the incidents and actions in question constitute a grave danger to the host State. It does not seem that any such danger could be posed by workers from EU Member States, who, by acting in a spirit of selfless renunciation, have done credit to their countries of origin and helped to foster progress in the countries where they live and work. The attitude of the German authorities is reflected in their management of residence permits, in which the philosophy underlying Community legislation is being exploited for domestic policy ends and which, moreover, is incompatible with the Treaty to the extent that it fails to distinguish between workers from Community Member States and those from other countries for the purposes of deportation on grounds of public policy and thus discriminates against Community migrants in relation to other European citizens