WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2361/98 by Angela BILLINGHAM to the Commission. UEFA rule on common ownership
22. 2. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 50/143 network does not limit itself to monitoring company activities but is also ádevoting its attentioní to governments and organizations of every kind. This is a particularly serious matter giving rise to legitimate queries concerning the possibility of prying into the lives of EU citizens, thereby invading their privacy. What view does the Commission take of the use of the above network for espionage purposes with its enormous implications, distorting free competition and endangering individual privacy and constituting an act of wilful provocation by the United Kingdom since its participation in a network which spies on other European Union Member States undermines any notion of solidarity? Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (25 September 1998) The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1776/98 by Mr Manisco (1). (1) See page 90. (1999/C 50/215) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2361/98 by Angela Billingham (PSE) to the Commission (15 July 1998) Subject: UEFA rule on common ownership Is the Commission aware that monopoly sports organizations are imposing rules which affect sports throughout Europe, without explanation or prior consultation with those affected? The latest example is UEFAís new rule, introduced retrospectively and without consultation, to prohibit football clubs under common control from participating in the same European competition. Surely the Commission would agree that it is unacceptable for sporting organizations exercising monopoly power to continue to disregard the principles of transparency and consultation in making decisions which affect the economic development of sport in Europe? Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (3 September 1998) The Commission is aware that the Union of European football associations (UEFA) has recently adopted rules that regulate the participation in European competitions of clubs belonging to the same owner. It seems at first sight that these rules have a sporting nature and that they aim to preserve uncertainty of results, an objective which the Court of justice has recognised as legitimate in its judgement of 15 December 1995 in the Bosman case (1). Clearly, if clubs with the same owner can take part in the same competitions, whether national or international, doubts may arise as to whether the outcome is really undecided in advance. Nevertheless, it is necessary to determine whether these UEFA rules are limited to what is strictly necessary to attain the objective of ensuring the uncertainty as to results or whether there exist less restrictive means to achieve it. Provided that such rules remain in proportion to the sporting objective pursued, they would not be covered by the competition rules laid down in the EC Treaty. At this stage, the Commission does not possess all the necessary information to assess the compatibility of the rules with Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty. Whether UEFA has or not consulted other bodies is not relevant for this assessment. (1) Case C-415/93 (1995) ECR I-4921, paragraph 106