Il diritto di libera circolazione e la questione dei Rom
Nel corso degli ultimi mesi la situazione dei Rom, ed in particolare i suoi sviluppi in Francia, ha destato l’attenzione tanto dell’opinione pubblica europea, quanto delle istituzioni comunitarie. Questo argomento riguarda strettamente legislazione comunitaria on the free movement of citizens within the territory of ' European Union. Although the protection of public order and the promotion of integration, both social and economic, of the Roma population is essentially the responsibility of each member state, it is equally true that, since EU citizens, they must respect their treatment is complied with European legislation, specifically the rules on free movement and non-discrimination and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights .
On the one hand it recognizes the right of the European Union Member States to nationals of a standard treatment is very different (mainly based on equality of treatment) compared to that of citizens of third countries, both by asking specific, exceptional limits on the power of national governments to expel EU citizens, both in their favor recognizing a wide range of guarantees. Secondly, Community law also enshrines the prohibition of discrimination, in particular those based on race, ethnic or social origin, or membership of a national minority.
Since the political issues are mixed to the more strictly legal, creating some uncertainty about the correct (at least from a legal standpoint) evaluation of the events, appare utile fornire una breve panoramica del quadro giuridico europeo in questione e una sintetica analisi degli eventi che si sono sviluppati negli ultimi mesi, tanto a livello nazionale, quanto europeo.
Nel corso degli ultimi mesi la situazione dei Rom, ed in particolare i suoi sviluppi in Francia, ha destato l’attenzione tanto dell’opinione pubblica europea, quanto delle istituzioni comunitarie. Questo argomento riguarda strettamente legislazione comunitaria on the free movement of citizens within the territory of ' European Union. Although the protection of public order and the promotion of integration, both social and economic, of the Roma population is essentially the responsibility of each member state, it is equally true that, since EU citizens, they must respect their treatment is complied with European legislation, specifically the rules on free movement and non-discrimination and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights .
On the one hand it recognizes the right of the European Union Member States to nationals of a standard treatment is very different (mainly based on equality of treatment) compared to that of citizens of third countries, both by asking specific, exceptional limits on the power of national governments to expel EU citizens, both in their favor recognizing a wide range of guarantees. Secondly, Community law also enshrines the prohibition of discrimination, in particular those based on race, ethnic or social origin, or membership of a national minority.
Since the political issues are mixed to the more strictly legal, creating some uncertainty about the correct (at least from a legal standpoint) evaluation of the events, appare utile fornire una breve panoramica del quadro giuridico europeo in questione e una sintetica analisi degli eventi che si sono sviluppati negli ultimi mesi, tanto a livello nazionale, quanto europeo.
Diritto di libera circolazione e non discriminazione
Nell’architettura giuridica comunitaria, la libertà di circolazione costituisce una delle libertà fondamentali di tutti i cittadini dell’Unione Europea. La base legale di questo diritto risiede nel Trattato sul funzionamento dell’Unione Europea che, secondo l’articolo 21(1), garantisce a tutti i cittadini comunitari il diritto di circolare e soggiornare liberamente all’interno del territorio dei 27 stati membri. Il diritto di circolazione riceve dunque la tutela di più alto livello, essendo menzionato inoltre all’interno della Carta Europea dei Diritti Fondamentali (articolo 45) , resa giuridicamente vincolante per tutti gli stati membri con l’approvazione del Trattato di Lisbona. Tale diritto non riceve tuttavia una tutela incondizionata, ma è soggetto alle limitazioni e alle condizione espresse all’interno della Direttiva sulla Liberta di Circolazione 2004/38 del 29.4.2004 “relativa al diritto dei cittadini dell’Unione e dei loro familiari di circolare e soggiornare liberamente nel territorio degli Stati membri”, che ha modificato il regolamento 1612/68 sulla libera circolazione dei employed and repealed the existing nine directives on free movement, entry and residence.
In the case of two citizens from the New Accession Countries, and this is the case of nationals of Roma origin (mostly from Romania and Bulgaria), other conditions, although transient, are imposed by the Treaty of Accession signed by the same states April 25, 2005. In line with the transitional provisions, France imposes a duty on the Bulgarian and Romanian nationals to obtain authorization to work, at least for a certain number of activities, before entering its territory, the transitional provision has also made use Italy, but for a longer period limited (up to 31.12.2010, and for a very limited scope of activities). According to the directive of
2004, for stays of up to three months, the only restriction on freedom of movement is the possession of a valid identity document states shall not impose any other conditions.
If an EU citizen decides to extend his stay should be "economically active" or have sufficient resources to avoid becoming a burden on the social system and have health insurance. If the city does not fill these conditions, has no right of residence and the host State may decide to request its removal. Even with regard to the situation of Roma, is important to note that, before issuing the deportation order, the host must conduct an examination of the individual circumstances of the subject. A Member State is also obliged to conduct an assessment on the proportionality of its decision. The legislation therefore requires that it is always done on a case by case, in case the reason of removal is linked to issues of public policy or public security.
regard to procedural matters, the decision for expulsion should be written, fully justified and allow the right of appeal.
Recent developments in France on 28
June 2010, the French authorities have announced a press officer with a series of measures concerning the situation of Travellers and Roma ("gens de voyage et Roms"), with the aim of:
- Vacate 200 illegal encampments France over 3 months, because of the "illegality" that is connected to the same: trafficking and child exploitation for the purposes dell'accattonaggio, prostitution and violation of private property;
- Reforming the current law to allow French, in the future, a process of dismantling illegal settlements more efficient;
- expelled from the territory French EU citizens from Eastern Europe, mostly from Romania and Bulgaria, in an irregular situation;
- deport them and pay for this purpose a "help to return and reintegration of 300 € for adults and 100 for children;
- Use, in October, a database called OSCAR for the fingerprinting of recipients of 'help' in order to identify possible fraud (such as recurrence of the same request from the same person using different identities ).
On 30 August, the French authorities have already announced that 128 illegal camps had been dismantled and that 979 people Romanian and Bulgarian nationals staying illegally were deported (151 forcibly, voluntarily and 828).
In a meeting requested by the European Commission , the French authorities stated that they have already begun to implement such measures before, but have accelerated the implementation of the last period.
Controversial aspects of the measures taken by the French authorities
According to a preliminary assessment, the services of European Commission found that there is no doubt that the French authorities have the obligation to assess all the individual circumstances and procedural requirements. In addition, the Commission considered that the mere fact that recent returns have been defined as "voluntary" (and there is provision for a lump sum payment) is not sufficient to consider them outside the range of principles on freedom of movement. The Commission has also undertaken a finding as to what are the consequences for those who try to return to France. In fact, the re-entry ban can not be imposed on EU citizens, unless the expulsion was not motivated by matters of public order or safety.
In a meeting requested by the European Commission , the French authorities stated that they have already begun to implement such measures before, but have accelerated the implementation of the last period.
Controversial aspects of the measures taken by the French authorities
According to a preliminary assessment, the services of European Commission found that there is no doubt that the French authorities have the obligation to assess all the individual circumstances and procedural requirements. In addition, the Commission considered that the mere fact that recent returns have been defined as "voluntary" (and there is provision for a lump sum payment) is not sufficient to consider them outside the range of principles on freedom of movement. The Commission has also undertaken a finding as to what are the consequences for those who try to return to France. In fact, the re-entry ban can not be imposed on EU citizens, unless the expulsion was not motivated by matters of public order or safety.
reactions of Parliament and the Commission
On 9 September the European Parliament adopted a resolution with which it expressed deep concern that measures taken in the fight against the Roma in several respects, with European Union law. The European Parliament also accused the Commission of having given a belated response to what happened France.
The European Commission's response was harsh: in an interview released Sept. 15, the Vice-President Viviane Reding , accusing France of discrimination that no longer had earlier in Europe since the Second World War, announced willingness to open infringement proceedings against France. The motivation was not resident, however, nell’accusa di discriminazione di una minoranza etnica, ma nell’incompleta trasposizione della direttiva del 2004 sulla libera circolazione dei cittadini europei.
A seguito di contatti ripetuti con le autorità francesi e al loro impegno a risolvere la situazione, la Vicepresidente ha annunciato il 19 ottobre la sospensione della procedura di infrazione avviata nei confronti della Francia, ai sensi dell’art. 258 del Trattato sul funzionamento dell’Unione Europea .
Conclusioni
La spaccatura che si è prodotta in seno al Consiglio europeo lo scorso 16 settembre sembra non avere precedenti. Lo scontro che si è verificato è not so unusual for bright tones, giving rise to concern, however, but the nature of the matter. It was not material questions of fact or institutional, as the method of allocation of resources, or the voting rights. The rift occurred, however, the interpretation of a founding principle, have never been challenged so directly and radical form: the member states are ready to accept that citizenship involves rights for those who have no transport and can therefore to constitute a burden to the state guest? And what happens if it is one that is defined by many the largest European minority (it fluctuates between 10 and 12 million people), characterized by a high degree poverty and social marginalization, and identified in the public eye by stretches of alleged ethnic and cultural homogeneity that make it physically identifiable? What is the actual degree of protection that the EU is able to ensure their rights in case of discriminatory treatment by one or more member states?
The clash between the European Institutions and France, supported by Italy and the Czech Republic now seems to have deflated the statement issued on behalf of the European Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding October 19. The Commission has accepted, in fact, the assurances made by government francese su una futura trasposizione adeguata della legislazione comunitaria. Tuttavia, osservatori internazionali, tra i quali la EU Roma Policy Coalition , rilevano come questo lasci irrisolta la situazione centinaia di persone allontanate, in modo più o meno volontario, nel corso delle scorse settimane e che non hanno avuto accesso alla giustizia.
Non bisogna sottovalutare il potenziale di riproduzione che la situazione attuale potrebbe avere in futuro. L’apparente chiusura della questione non ha dato in realtà una risposta sugli sviluppi futuri, che rimangono ancora aperti.
La risposta, almeno inizialmente severa, della Commissione europea, ma soprattutto della sua Vicepresidente Viviane Reding, has been a clear signal to Member States. It remains to be seen whether this story will be developed at European level a reflection and a harbinger of consultation results. Many, for example, advocates the creation of a genuine European framework strategy on Roma Inclusion
0 comments:
Post a Comment