EUR-Lex - 31998H0561 - EN Avis juridique important | 31998H0561 98/561/EC: Council Recommendation of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education Official Journal L 270 , 07/10/1998 P. 0056 - 0059 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education (98/561/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 126 and 127 thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (1),Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions (2),Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189c of the Treaty (3),(1) Whereas a high quality of education and training is an objective for all Member States; whereas the Community is called on to contribute to their ongoing efforts by promoting cooperation between Member States and, if necessary, by supporting and supplementing their action while fully respecting their responsibility for the content of teaching and the organisation of education and training systems and their cultural and linguistic diversity;(2) Whereas in its conclusions of 25 November 1991 (4) the Council stated that improving the quality of higher education was a concern shared by each Member State and by every institution of higher education within the European Community; whereas, in view of the diversity of methods used at national level, national experience could be complemented by European experience acquired, in particular, through pilot projects aimed at establishing cooperation in this area or at strengthening existing cooperation;(3) Whereas the replies to the Commission memorandum on higher education stress inter alia that quality should be guaranteed at all levels and in all sectors, with differences between institutions only in terms of objectives, methods and educational demand; whereas there is general support for the introduction of efficient and acceptable methods of quality assurance which take into account European and international experience and the possibility of cooperation;(4) Whereas a Commission study on the state of quality assurance in the Member States revealed that the new quality assurance systems had certain points in common; whereas the two pilot projects conducted subsequently were based on these core elements of existing national systems; whereas they tested a common method successfully and showed that the players in the field are all eager to pursue exchanges of experience which demonstrate the diversity of national evaluation cultures as well as the importance of quality assurance in general;(5) Whereas, in view of the great diversity of education systems in the Community, the definition of the term 'higher education institution` to which the recommendation refers includes all the types of institutions which confer qualifications or degrees at this level irrespective of how they are described in the Member States; whereas this definition is used in the decision establishing the Socrates programme;(6) Whereas higher education institutions have to meet the new educational and social requirements of a world-wide 'knowledge society` and the resulting developments; whereas they will, therefore, endeavour to improve the required attributes of the services they provide by developing, where appropriate, new initiatives (individually or on a collaborative basis within higher education associations), aimed at increasing the quality of teaching and learning;(7) Whereas the technological and economic changes and their consequences for the labour market pose new challenges for higher education institutions and whereas, in view of the challenges of global competition as well as the ever increasing influx of students into higher education institutions, Member States face the task of organising their higher education systems and their relationships vis-à-vis State and society in ways which respect existing academic standards, training objectives, quality standards, the autonomy and/or the independence - in terms of the relevant structures in each Member State - of higher education institutions, and the need to be accountable to and inform the public;(8) Whereas discussion of the Commission communication of 13 February 1994 has demonstrated that quality assurance systems could contribute towards mutual recognition of academic or professional qualifications at Community level;(9) Whereas the Commission White Paper on 'Growth, Competitiveness and Employment`, the White Paper on 'Teaching and Learning: towards the Learning Society` and the Green Paper on 'Education - Training - Research. The obstacles to transnational mobility` indicate how important high-quality education is for employment and growth within the Community and for its competitiveness at world level; whereas these documents highlight the link that exists between the social and cultural functions of education and training, on the one hand, and their economic functions, on the other hand, and therefore the many aspects of the concept of quality; whereas it is clear that transparent educational systems are required for transnational mobility;(10) Whereas encouraging mobility is one of the aims of Community cooperation in the fields of education and training; whereas the Commission Green Paper on 'Education - Training - Research. The obstacles to transnational mobility` examines the principal legal, administrative and practical obstacles encountered by students wishing to study in another Member State, proposes measures to improve mobility and stresses that this type of mobility is beneficial to an education of high quality which can enable individuals to compete internationally and to take advantage of freedom of movement within the Community;(11) Whereas the size, structure and funding of higher education systems differ from Member State to Member State and the objectives of these systems will continue to evolve; whereas in certain Member States the higher education system includes universities and other higher education institutions, often pursuing vocational aims; whereas the concept, scope and methods of quality assurance will be defined by each Member State and will remain flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances and/or structures;(12) In view of Member States' exclusive responsibilities for the organisation and structure of their higher education systems and of their budgetary constraints, and in view of the autonomy and/or independence of higher education institutions, in terms of the relevant structures in each Member State,I. HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Member States:A. support and, where necessary, establish transparent quality assurance systems with the following aims:- to safeguard the quality of higher education within the specific economic, social and cultural context of their countries while taking due account of the European dimension and of a rapidly changing world,- to encourage and help higher education institutions to use appropriate measures, particularly quality assurance, as a means of improving the quality of teaching and learning and also training for research, another important part of their task,- to stimulate mutual exchanges of information on quality and quality assurance at Community and world level and to encourage cooperation between higher education institutions in this area;B. base systems of quality assurance on the following features, as explained in the Annex:- autonomy and/or independence in terms of the relevant structures in each Member State for the bodies responsible for quality assurance in their choice of procedures and methods,- adaptation of quality assurance procedures and methods to the profile and aims of higher education institutions, while respecting their autonomy and/or independence in terms of the relevant structures in each Member State,- targeted utilisation of internal and/or external aspects of quality assurance adapted to the procedures and methods used,- involvement of the different parties concerned according to the purpose of the quality assurance,- publication of quality assurance results in a form which is appropriate to each Member State;C. where necessary, encourage higher education institutions, in cooperation with the competent structures of the Member States, to take appropriate follow-up measures;D. call upon the competent authorities and higher education institutions to attach special importance to the exchange of experience and cooperation regarding quality assurance with other Member States, as well as with international organisations and associations active in the field of higher education;E. promote cooperation between the authorities responsible for quality assessment or quality assurance in higher education and promote networking.This cooperation could cover some or all of the following areas:(a) encouraging and developing the exchange of information and experience, in particular on methodological developments and examples of good practice;(b) fulfilling the requests for expertise and advice from the authorities concerned in the Member States;(c) supporting higher education institutions which wish to cooperate in the field of quality assurance on a transnational basis;(d) promoting contacts with international experts.In pursuing these objectives the developing links between quality assurance and other existing Community activities in particular in the framework of the Socrates and Leonardo da Vinci programmes should be taken into account, as should the 'acquis communautaire` in the field of recognition of qualifications for professional purposes.II. HEREBY RECOMMENDS:that the Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States and on the basis of existing programmes and subject to their objectives and normal open and transparent procedures, encourage the cooperation referred to in point I.E between the authorities responsible for quality assessment and quality assurance in higher education, also involving organisations and associations of higher education institutions with a European remit and the necessary experience in quality assessment and quality assurance.III. HEREBY REQUESTS:the Commission to present triennial reports to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on progress in the development of quality assurance systems in the various Member States and on cooperation activities at European level including the progress achieved with respect to the objectives referred to above.Done at Brussels, 24 September 1998.For the CouncilThe PresidentJ. FARNLEITNER(1) OJ C 19, 21. 1. 1998, p. 39.(2) OJ C 64, 27. 2. 1998, p. 63.(3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 18 November 1997 (OJ C 371, 8. 12. 1997, p. 33), Council common position of 26 February 1998 (not yet published in the Official Journal) and Decision of the European Parliament of 28 May 1998 (not yet published in the Official Journal).(4) OJ C 321, 12. 12. 1991, p. 2.ANNEX Indicative features of quality assurance The features referred to below are common to existing European quality assurance systems. The European pilot projects assessing the quality of higher education have demonstrated that all parties involved in this area can benefit from observing these features.The autonomy and/or independence, in terms of the relevant structures in each Member State, of the body responsible for quality assurance (as regards procedures and methods) is likely to contribute to the effectiveness of quality assurance procedures and the acceptance of their results.Quality assurance criteria are closely linked to the aims assigned to each institution in relation to the needs of society and of the labour market; the different quality assurance procedures must therefore include allowance for the specific nature of the institution. Knowledge of the institution's objectives, be it at the level of the whole institution, at the level of a department or at the level of a single unit, is essential in this respect.Quality assurance procedures should generally consist of an internal, self-examination component and an external component based on appraisal by external experts.The internal element of self-examination should aim to involve all the relevant players, especially teaching staff and, where appropriate, administrators in charge of academic and professional guidance, as well as students. The external element should be a process of cooperation, consultation and advice between independent experts from outside and players from within the institution.In the light of the objectives and criteria used in the quality assurance procedure and with reference to the structures of higher education in the Member States, professional associations, social partners and alumni could be included in the expert groups.The participation of foreign experts in the procedures would be desirable in order to encourage exchange of experience acquired in other countries.Reports on quality assurance procedures and their outcome should be published in a form appropriate to each Member State and should provide a source of good reference material for partners and for the general public.

Summary: Quality of higher education Quality of higher education Europe is a world leader in education. To maintain its cutting edge, European Education ministers recommended the introduction of quality assessment and quality assurance mechanisms into higher education (HE) systems. ACT Council Recommendation 98/561/EC on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education. SUMMARY In 1998, European Union countries agreed to establish transparent quality assessment and quality assurance systems in the field of HE. To safeguard and improve HE quality while taking due account of national conditions, the European dimension and international requirements, these systems were to have the following features: autonomy and independence of bodies responsible for quality assessment and quality assurance; relating evaluation procedures to the way institutions see themselves; internal and external assessment; involvement of all the players (teachers, administrators, students, alumni, social partners, professional associations, foreign experts); publication of evaluations. In 2006, a joint European Parliament and Council recommendation called for the introduction of internal QA systems in line with standards and guidelines adopted in Bergen in the context of the Bologna Process, as well as for the creation of the European Register of Quality Assurance Agencies (EQAR).The recommendation called on Member States to enable their HE institutions to select a quality assurance or accreditation agency from the EQAR list that meets their needs and profile, provided that this is compatible with their national legislation or permitted by their national authorities. Three-yearly reports Reports are prepared to monitor progress on QA in HE. Although progress has been good, some shortcomings have been identified. In the 2014 report, gaps in how QA supports HE reforms are cited, such as widening access, improving employability and internationalisation or improving doctoral training and human resources strategies. To bridge these, QA has to become a means of support to creating an internal quality culture in HE institutions rather than a box-ticking procedure. There is a need for a sector-based approach toQA and a need to find out if it is possible to identify some basic principles and guidelines that are valid across sectors and applicable to all qualifications. Planned actions Actions to improve European cooperation in QA for lifelong learning include: consulting on the need for and feasibility of improving coherence between QA in different education subsectors; reform of the European standards and guidelines (ESG), stressingtheraisingofquality standards rather than procedural approaches, as well as the widening of their scope; synergies between existing tools - continuing to promote transparency tools that support quality assurance, such as EQF, ECTS, Eqavet and Europass; working with Member States to encourage more QA agencies to apply for EQAR registration and to allow foreign EQAR-registered agencies to operate in their HE systems; promoting cooperation on QA at international level, through policy dialogue with partners and as a basis for partnerships with HE institutions around the world (via Erasmus+). REFERENCES Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal Recommendation 98/561/EC - - OJ L 270 of 7.10.1998 RELATED ACTS Recommendation 2006/143/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on further European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education (Official Journal L 64 of 4 March 2006). Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Report on progress in quality assurance in higher education (COM(2009) 487 final of 21 September 2009). Report from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Report on progress in quality assurance in higher education (COM(2014) 29 final of 28 January 2014 - not published in the Official Journal). Council conclusions of 20 May 2014 on quality assurance supporting education and training (Official Journal C 183 of 14 June 2014). Last updated: 06.07.2014


EUR-Lex - 31997L0081 - EN Avis juridique important | 31997L0081 Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC - Annex : Framework agreement on part-time work Official Journal L 014 , 20/01/1998 P. 0009 - 0014 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUCTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Agreement on social policy annexed to the Protocol (No 14) on social policy, annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 4(2) thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,(1) Whereas on the basis of the Protocol on social policy annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community, the Member States, with the exception of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (hereinafter referred to as 'the Member States`), wishing to continue along the path laid down in the 1989 Social Charter, have concluded an agreement on social policy;(2) Whereas management and labour (the social partners) may, in accordance with Article 4(2) of the Agreement on social policy, request jointly that agreements at Community level be implemented by a Council decision on a proposal from the Commission;(3) Whereas point 7 of the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers provides, inter alia, that 'the completion of the internal market must lead to an improvement in the living and working conditions of workers in the European Community. This process must result from an approximation of these conditions while the improvement is being maintained, as regards in particular (. . .) forms of employment other than open-ended contracts, such as fixed-term contracts, part-time working, temporary work and seasonal work`;(4) Whereas the Council has not reached a decision on the proposal for a Directive on certain employment relationships with regard to distortions of competition (1), as amended (2), nor on the proposal for a Directive on certain employment relationships with regard to working conditions (3);(5) Whereas the conclusions of the Essen European Council stressed the need to take measures to promote employment and equal opportunities for women and men, and called for measures with a view to increasing the employment-intensiveness of growth, in particular by a more flexible organization of work in a way which fulfils both the wishes of employees and the requirements of competition;(6) Whereas the Commission, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Agreement on social policy, has consulted management and labour on the possible direction of Community action with regard to flexible working time and job security;(7) Whereas the Commission, considering after such consultation that Community action was desirable, once again consulted management and labour at Community level on the substance of the envisaged proposal in accordance with Article 3(3) of the said Agreement;(8) Whereas the general cross-industry organizations, the Union of Industrial and Employer's Confederations of Europe (UNICE), the European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation (CEEP) and the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) informed the Commission in their joint letter of 19 June 1996 of their desire to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 4 of the Agreement on social policy; whereas they asked the Commission, in a joint letter dated 12 March 1997, for a further three months; whereas the Commission complied with this request;(9) Whereas the said cross-industry organizations concluded, on 6 June 1997, a Framework Agreement on part-time work; whereas they forwarded to the Commission their joint request to implement this Framework Agreement by a Council decision on a proposal from the Commission, in accordance with Article 4(2) of the said Agreement;(10) Whereas the Council, in its Resolution of 6 December 1994 on prospects for a European Union social policy: contribution to economic and social convergence in the Union (4), asked management and labour to make use of the opportunities for concluding agreements, since they are as a rule closer to social reality and to social problems;(11) Whereas the signatory parties wished to conclude a framework agreement on part-time work setting out the general principles and minimum requirements for part-time working; whereas they have demonstrated their desire to establish a general framework for eliminating discrimination against part-time workers and to contribute to developing the potential for part-time work on a basis which is acceptable for employers and workers alike;(12) Whereas the social partners wished to give particular attention to part-time work, while at the same time indicating that it was their intention to consider the need for similar agreements for other flexible forms of work;(13) Whereas, in the conclusions of the Amsterdam European Council, the Heads of State and Government of the European Union strongly welcomed the agreement concluded by the social partners on part-time work;(14) Whereas the proper instrument for implementing the Framework Agreement is a Directive within the meaning of Article 189 of the Treaty; whereas it therefore binds the Member States as to the result to be achieved, whilst leaving national authorities the choice of form and methods;(15) Whereas, in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality as set out in Article 3(b) of the Treaty, the objectives of this Directive cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better achieved by the Community; wheres this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary for the attainment of those objectives;(16) Whereas, with regard to terms used in the Framework Agreement which are not specifically defined therein, this Directive leaves Member States free to define those terms in accordance with national law and practice, as is the case for other social policy Directives using similar terms, providing that the said definitions respect the content of the Framework Agreement;(17) Whereas the Commission has drafted its proposal for a Directive, in accordance with its Communication of 14 December 1993 concerning the application of the Protocol (No 14) on social policy and its Communication of 18 September 1996 concerning the development of the social dialogue at Community level, taking into account the representative status of the signatory parties and the legality of each clause of the Framework Agreement;(18) Whereas the Commission has drafted its proposal for a Directive in compliance with Article 2(2) of the Agreement on social policy which provides that Directives in the social policy domain 'shall avoid imposing administrative, financial and legal constraints in a way which would hold back the creation and development of small and medium-sized undertakings`;(19) Whereas the Commission, in accordance with its Communication of 14 December 1993 concerning the application of the Protocol (No 14) on social policy, informed the European Parliament by sending it the text of its proposal for a Directive containing the Framework Agreement;(20) Whereas the Commission also informed the Economic and Social Committee;(21) Whereas Clause 6.1 of the Framework Agreement provides that Member States and/or the social partners may maintain or introduce more favourable provisions;(22) Whereas Clause 6.2 of the Framework Agreement provides that implementation of this Directive may not serve to justify any regression in relation to the situation which already exists in each Member State;(23) Whereas the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers recognizes the importance of the fight against all forms of discrimination, especially based on sex, colour, race, opinion and creed;(24) Whereas Article F(2) of the Treaty on European Union states that the Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law;(25) Whereas the Member States may entrust the social partners, at their joint request, with the implementation of this Directive, provided that the Member States take all the necessary steps to ensure that they can at all times guarantee the results imposed by this Directive;(26) Whereas the implementation of the Framework Agreement contributes to achieving the objectives under Article 1 of the Agreement on social policy,HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:Article 1 The purpose of this Directive is to implement the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded on 6 June 1997 between the general cross-industry organizations (UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC) annexed hereto.Article 2 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive not later than 20 January 2000, or shall ensure that, by that date at the latest, the social partners have introduced the necessary measures by agreement, the Member States being required to take any necessary measures to enable them at any time to be in a position to guarantee the results imposed by this Directive. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.Member States may have a maximum of one more year, if necessary, to take account of special difficulties or implementation by a collective agreement.They shall inform the Commission forthwith in such circumstances.When Member States adopt the measures referred to in the first subparagraph, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such a reference shall be laid down by the Member States.2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of domestic law which they have adopted or which they adopt in the field governed by this Directive.Article 3 This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.Article 4 This Directive is addressed to the Member States.Done at Brussels, 15 December 1997.For the CouncilThe PresidentJ.-C. JUNCKER(1) OJ C 224, 8. 9. 1990, p. 6.(2) OJ C 305, 5. 12. 1990, p. 8.(3) OJ C 224, 8. 9. 1990, p. 4.(4) OJ C 368, 23. 12. 1994, p. 6.ANNEX UNION OF INDUSTRIAL AND EMPLOYERS' CONFEDERATIONS OF EUROPE EUROPEAN TRADE UNION CONFEDERATION EUROPEAN CENTRE OF ENTERPRISES WITH PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON PART-TIME WORK PreambleThis Framework Agreement is a contribution to the overall European strategy on employment. Part-time work has had an important impact on employment in recent years. For this reason, the parties to this agreement have given priority attention to this form of work. It is the intention of the parties to consider the need for similar agreements relating to other forms of flexible work.Recognizing the diversity of situations in Member States and acknowledging that part-time work is a feature of employment in certain sectors and activities, this Agreement sets out the general principles and minimum requirements relating to part-time work. It illustrates the willingness of the social partners to establish a general framework for the elimination of discrimination against part-time workers and to assist the development of opportunities for part-time working on a basis acceptable to employers and workers.This Agreement relates to employment conditions of part-time workers recognizing that matters concerning statutory social security are for decision by the Member States. In the context of the principle of non-discrimination, the parties to this Agreement have noted the Employment Declaration of the Dublin European Council of December 1996, wherein the Council inter alia emphasized the need to make social security systems more employment-friendly by 'developing social protection systems capable of adapting to new patterns of work and of providing appropriate protection to people engaged in such work`. The parties to this Agreement consider that effect should be given to this Declaration.ETUC, UNICE and CEEP request the Commission to submit this Framework Agreement to the Council for a decision making these requirements binding in the Member States which are party to the Agreement on social policy annexed to the Protocol (No 14) on social policy annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community.The parties to this Agreement ask the Commission, in its proposal to implement this Agreement, to request that Member States adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Council decision within a period of two years from its adoption or ensure (1) that the social partners establish the necessary measures by way of agreement by the end of this period. Member States may, if necessary to take account of particular difficulties or implementation by collective agreement, have up to a maximum of one additional year to comply with this provision.Without prejudice to the role of national courts and the Court of Justice, the parties to this agreement request that any matter relating to the interpretation of this agreement at European level should, in the first instance, be referred by the Commission to them for an opinion.General considerations1. Having regard to the Agreement on social policy annexed to the Protocol (No 14) on social policy annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 3(4) and 4(2) thereof;2. Whereas Article 4(2) of the Agreement on social policy provides that agreements concluded at Community level may be implemented, at the joint request of the signatory parties, by a Council decision on a proposal from the Commission.3. Whereas, in its second consultation document on flexibility of working time and security for workers, the Commission announced its intention to propose a legally binding Community measure;4. Whereas the conclusions of the European Council meeting in Essen emphasized the need for measures to promote both employment and equal opportunities for women and men, and called for measures aimed at 'increasing the employment intensiveness of growth, in particular by more flexible organization of work in a way which fulfils both the wishes of employees and the requirements of competition`;5. Whereas the parties to this agreement attach importance to measures which would facilitate access to part-time work for men and women in order to prepare for retirement, reconcile professional and family life, and take up education and training opportunities to improve their skills and career opportunities for the mutual benefit of employers and workers and in a manner which would assist the development of enterprises;6. Whereas this Agreement refers back to Member States and social partners for the arrangements for the application of these general principles, minimum requirements and provisions, in order to take account of the situation in each Member State;7. Whereas this Agreement takes into consideration the need to improve social policy requirements, to enhance the competitiveness of the Community economy and to avoid imposing administrative, financial and legal constraints in a way which would hold back the creation and development of small and medium-sized undertakings;8. Whereas the social partners are best placed to find solutions that correspond to the needs of both employers and workers and must therefore be given a special role in the implementation and application of this Agreement.THE SIGNATORY PARTIES HAVE AGREED THE FOLLOWING:Clause 1: PurposeThe purpose of this Framework Agreement is:(a) to provide for the removal of discrimination against part-time workers and to improve the quality of part-time work;(b) to facilitate the development of part-time work on a voluntary basis and to contribute to the flexible organization of working time in a manner which takes into account the needs of employers and workers.Clause 2: Scope1. This Agreement applies to part-time workers who have an employment contract or employment relationship as defined by the law, collective agreement or practice in force in each Member State.2. Member States, after consultation with the social partners in accordance with national law, collective agreements or practice, and/or the social partners at the appropriate level in conformity with national industrial relations practice may, for objective reasons, exclude wholly or partly from the terms of this Agreement part-time workers who work on a casual basis. Such exclusions should be reviewed periodically to establish if the objective reasons for making them remain valid.Clause 3: DefinitionsFor the purpose of this agreement:1. The term 'part-time worker` refers to an employee whose normal hours of work, calculated on a weekly basis or on average over a period of employment of up to one year, are less than the normal hours of work of a comparable full-time worker.2. The term 'comparable full-time worker` means a full-time worker in the same establishment having the same type of employment contract or relationship, who is engaged in the same or a similar work/occupation, due regard being given to other considerations which may include seniority and qualification/skills.Where there is no comparable full-time worker in the same establishment, the comparison shall be made by reference to the applicable collective agreement or, where there is no applicable collective agreement, in accordance with national law, collective agreements or practice.Clause 4: Principle of non-discrimination1. In respect of employment conditions, part-time workers shall not be treated in a less favourable manner than comparable full-time workers solely because they work part time unless different treatment is justified on objective grounds.2. Where appropriate, the principle of pro rata temporis shall apply.3. The arrangements for the application of this clause shall be defined by the Member States and/or social partners, having regard to European legislation, national law, collective agreements and practice.4. Where justified by objective reasons, Member States after consultation of the social partners in accordance with national law, collective agreements or practice and/or social partners may, where appropriate, make access to particular conditions of employment subject to a period of service, time worked or earnings qualification. Qualifications relating to access by part-time workers to particular conditions of employment should be reviewed periodically having regard to the principle of non-discrimination as expressed in Clause 4.1.Clause 5: Opportunities for part-time work1. In the context of Clause 1 of this Agreement and of the principle of non-discrimination between part-time and full-time workers:(a) Member States, following consultations with the social partners in accordance with national law or practice, should identify and review obstacles of a legal or administrative nature which may limit the opportunities for part-time work and, where appropriate, eliminate them;(b) the social partners, acting within their sphere of competence and through the procedures set out in collective agreements, should identify and review obstacles which may limit opportunities for part-time work and, where appropriate, eliminate them.2. A worker's refusal to transfer from full-time to part-time work or vice-versa should not in itself constitute a valid reason for termination of employment, without prejudice to termination in accordance with national law, collective agreements and practice, for other reasons such as may arise from the operational requirements of the establishment concerned.3. As far as possible, employers should give consideration to:(a) requests by workers to transfer from full-time to part-time work that becomes available in the establishment;(b) requests by workers to transfer from part-time to full-time work or to increase their working time should the opportunity arise;(c) the provision of timely information on the availability of part-time and full-time positions in the establishment in order to facilitate transfers from full-time to part-time or vice versa;(d) measures to facilitate access to part-time work at all levels of the enterprise, including skilled and managerial positions, and where appropriate, to facilitate access by part-time workers to vocational training to enhance career opportunities and occupational mobility;(e) the provision of appropriate information to existing bodies representing workers about part-time working in the enterprise.Clause 6: Provisions on implementation1. Member States and/or social partners may maintain or introduce more favourable provisions than set out in this agreement.2. Implementation of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute valid grounds for reducing the general level of protection afforded to workers in the field of this agreement. This does not prejudice the right of Member States and/or social partners to develop different legislative, regulatory or contractual provisions, in the light of changing circumstances, and does not prejudice the application of Clause 5.1 as long as the principle of non-discrimination as expressed in Clause 4.1 is complied with.3. This Agreement does not prejudice the right of the social partners to conclude, at the appropriate level, including European level, agreements adapting and/or complementing the provisions of this Agreement in a manner which will take account of the specific needs of the social partners concerned.4. This Agreement shall be without prejudice to any more specific Community provisions, and in particular Community provisions concerning equal treatment or opportunities for men and women.5. The prevention and settlement of disputes and grievances arising from the application of this Agreement shall be dealt with in accordance with national law, collective agreements and practice.6. The signatory parties shall review this Agreement, five years after the date of the Council decision, if requested by one of the parties to this Agreement.(1) Within the meaning of Article 2(4) of the Agreement on social policy of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

Summary: Part-time work Part-time work SUMMARY OF: Directive 97/81/EC – the Framework Agreement on part-time working concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (trade unions) WHAT IS THE AIM OF THE DIRECTIVE? It seeks to implement the Framework Agreement on part-time work agreed between the European Union’s (EU) employers and trade unions (the social partners). The agreement sets out to remove unjustified discrimination of part-time workers and improve the quality of part-time work. It also aims to help develop part-time work on a voluntary basis and allow employees and employers to organise working time in a way which suits both parties’ needs. KEY POINTS Who does it apply to? It applies to part-time workers who have an employment contract or employment relationship as defined in each EU country. Those working only on a casual basis may be excluded for objective reasons following consultation between the EU country concerned and its social partners. Non-discrimination Part-time workers cannot be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers solely because they work part-time, unless it can be objectively justified. Particular employment conditions may be subject to a period of service, time worked or based on the level of earnings, following consultation between EU countries and social partners. Access to part-time work EU countries and social partners should seek out, review and if necessary remove any legal or administrative issue which reduces opportunities for part-time work. A worker’s refusal to transfer from full-time to part-time work or vice versa is not sufficient reason for their dismissal. The role of employers Employers should fully consider: requests to transfer from full-time work to any part-time work that becomes available; requests to transfer from part-time to full-time or to increase working time where the opportunity arises; providing timely information on the availability of part-time and full-time jobs; measures to promote part-time work at all levels of the company; providing appropriate information to worker's representatives about part-time working. Implementation EU countries or social partners can introduce more favourable rules than those set out in the agreement. However, implementing the agreement is not a valid reason to reduce the general level of protection afforded to part-time workers. FROM WHEN DOES THE DIRECTIVE APPLY? It has applied since 20 January 1998. EU countries had to incorporate it into national law by 20 January 2000. BACKGROUND For more information, see Working Conditions — Part-Time Work on the European Commission's website. MAIN DOCUMENT Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time working concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC - Annex : Framework agreement on part-time work (OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, pp. 9-14) Successive amendments to Directive 97/81/EC have been incorporated in the original text. This consolidated version is of documentary value only. RELATED DOCUMENTS National implementation measures Report by the Commission’s services on the implementation of Council Directive 97/81/EC of 17 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on Part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, 21.1.2003 This report is complemented by 2 studies: Commission Report - Implementation of Directive 97/81/EC concerning the framework agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and ETUC (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) (2007) Reports (Executive Summaries) on the implementation of Directive 1997/81/EC in Bulgaria and in Romania (2009) last update 04.12.2016


EUR-Lex - 31997G0111 - EN Avis juridique important | 31997G0111 Council Resolution of 20 December 1996 on individuals who cooperate with the judicial process in the fight against international organized crime Official Journal C 010 , 11/01/1997 P. 0001 - 0002 COUNCIL RESOLUTION of 20 December 1996 on individuals who cooperate with the judicial process in the fight against international organized crime (97/C 10/01)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,Having regard to the recommendations adopted by the Ministers for Justice and Home Affairs at their meeting in Kolding (Denmark) on 6 and 7 May 1993, calling for greater and more efficient cooperation in the European Union context in combating international organized crime,Having regard to the recommendations given in the report of the ad hoc Working Group on International Organized Crime and approved by the Council on 29 and 30 November 1993,Having regard to the conclusions of the Council on 30 November and 1 December 1994,Whereas the Madrid European Council on 15 and 16 December 1995 called for the necessary operational measures to be adopted to combat the threat posed by international organized crime;Having regard to the Council resolution of 23 November 1995 on the protection of witnesses in the fight against international organized crime (1),Believing that knowledge of criminal organizations may be significantly improved and their activities more effectively curbed by using the statements made to the competent authorities by members of such organizations who agree to cooperate with the judicial process,Believing that individuals should therefore be encouraged to cooperate with the judicial process,A. calls on Member States to adopt appropriate measures to encourage individuals who participate or have participated in an association of criminals or other criminal organization of any kind, or in organized crime offences, to cooperate with the judicial process.For the purposes of this resolution, cooperating with the judicial process includes:(a) supplying information useful to the competent authorities for investigative and evidential purposes on:(i) the composition, structure or activities of criminal organizations,(ii) links, including international links, with other criminal groups,(iii) offences which these organizations or groups have committed or might commit,(b) providing practical, concrete help to competent authorities which may contribute to depriving criminal organizations of illicit resources or of the proceeds of crime;B. calls on Member States to assess, in the context of the objectives set out in paragraph A, the possibility of granting, in accordance with the general principles of their national law, benefits to individuals who break away from a criminal organization and do their best to prevent the criminal activity being carried further, or provide specific help to the police or judicial authorities to collect evidence which proves decisive in reconstructing the facts and identifying the perpetrators of the crimes or leading to their arrest;C. calls on Member States to provide appropriate protection measures for any individual and, where necessary, for his parents, children and other persons close to him, who, by virtue of the individual's willingness to cooperate with the judicial process, is or are likely to be exposed to serious and immediate danger; in considering such measures, Member States should have regard to the resolution of 23 November 1995;D. calls on Member States to facilitate judicial assistance in the fight against international organized crime in cases involving individuals cooperating with the judicial process, and in particular:1. to observe the formalities and the procedural requirements of the requesting State when statements from individuals who cooperate with the judicial process are to be taken, even in the absence of any such provisions in the legislation of the State to which the request is addressed, save where compliance with the request for assistance would be contrary to the general principles of that State's law;2. to take account of the guidelines laid down by the resolution of 23 November 1995;3. to apply the provisions of paragraph C where individuals cooperate with the judicial process in another State;E. shall assess the implementation of this resolution on the basis of a report to be submitted to it through the Council Secretariat at the latest by the end of 1997.(1) OJ No C 327, 7. 12. 1995, p 5.

Summary: Cooperation of individuals to combat organised crime Cooperation of individuals to combat organised crime The judicial system needs evidence in order to convict offenders. Persons who are being prosecuted or convicted sometimes agree to cooperate with the criminal courts, in particular by giving evidence. The Council passed this resolution in December 1996 to stimulate persons to enhance cooperation regarding the judicial process in the European Union in combating international organised crime. ACT Council Resolution 97/C 10/01 of 20 December 1996, on individuals who cooperate with the judicial process in the fight against international organised crime. SUMMARY The Council calls on Member States to adopt appropriate measures to encourage individuals who participate or have participated in an association of criminals or other criminal organisation of any kind, or in organised crime offences, to cooperate with the judicial process. For the purposes of this resolution, cooperating with the judicial process includes: supplying information useful to the competent authorities for investigative and evidential purposes on: - the composition, structure or activities of criminal organizations, - links, including international links, with other criminal groups, - offences which these organizations or groups have committed or might commit, providing practical, concrete help to competent authorities which may contribute to depriving criminal organisations of illicit resources or of the proceeds of crime. The Council calls on Member States to assess, in the context of the objectives set out in paragraph 1, the possibility of granting, in accordance with the general principles of their national law, benefits to individuals who break away from a criminal organization and do their best to prevent the criminal activity being carried further, or provide specific help to the police or judicial authorities to collect evidence which proves decisive in reconstructing the facts and identifying the perpetrators of the crimes or leading to their arrest; The Council calls on Member States to provide appropriate protection measures for any individual and, where necessary, for his parents, children and other persons close to him, who, by virtue of the individual's willingness to cooperate with the judicial process, is or are likely to be exposed to serious and immediate danger; in considering such measures, Member States should have regard to the resolution of 23 November 1995. The Council calls on Member States to facilitate judicial assistance in the fight against international organised crime in cases involving individuals cooperating with the judicial process, and in particular: to observe the formalities and the procedural requirements of the requesting State when statements from individuals who cooperate with the judicial process are to be taken, even in the absence of any such provisions in the legislation of the State to which the request is addressed, save where compliance with the request for assistance would be contrary to the general principles of that State's law; to take account of the guidelines laid down by the resolution of 23 November 1995; to apply the provisions of paragraph C where individuals cooperate with the judicial process in another State. References Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal Council Resolution 97/C 10/01 - - Official Journal C 10 of 11.1.1997 See also For further information, see the website of the European Commission's Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security . Last updated: 03.11.2005


EUR-Lex - 31997G0111(01) - EN Avis juridique important | 31997G0111(01) Council Resolution of 20 December 1996 on sentencing for serious illicit drug-trafficking Official Journal C 010 , 11/01/1997 P. 0003 - 0004 COUNCIL RESOLUTION of 20 December 1996 on sentencing for serious illicit drug-trafficking (97/C 10/02)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,Whereas the development of close cooperation on justice and home affairs is a prime objective of the European Union and combating drug addiction and cooperation for the purposes of preventing and combating unlawful drug-trafficking are matters of common interest to the Member States;Recalling that the European Council in Cannes on 26 and 27 June 1995 approved the work on the European Union's action plan to combat drugs (1995 to 1999) and agreed on the need for a coordinated approach as regards illicit drug-trafficking;Recalling that the European Council in Madrid on 15 and 16 December 1995 approved the provisions of the comprehensive action plan to combat drugs, and has called on the Council and the Commission to consider the extent to which harmonization of Member States' laws could contribute to a reduction in the consumption of drugs and illicit trafficking in them;Recalling that the European Council in Florence on 21 and 22 June 1996 stressed the vital importance of reinforced cooperation between Member States to fight drugs and organized crime;Noting that illicit trafficking in drugs:- can undermine the lawful functioning of society,- represents a threat to the health, safety and quality of life of the Union's citizens,- often has consequences as destructive as those which flow from the most serious of crimes,- often is criminally organized and operates on a transnational scale,- if it is to be overcome, requires Member States to respond by taking coordinated and concerted action against those responsible for illicit trafficking in drugs,- is condemned by all Member States and is punishable by criminal sanctions in their respective national laws;Affirming that illicit trafficking in drugs comprises the offences set out in Article 3 (1) of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, 1988 (hereafter referred to as the 'UN 1988 Convention`);Recalling that a number of instruments have been adopted which facilitate Member States' fight against illicit drug-trafficking notably the United Nations 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as amended by the 1972 Protocol, the United Nations 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances, the UN 1988 Convention, the Council of Europe 1990 Convention on laundering, search, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime, Council Direcctive 91/308/EEC of 10 June 1991 on prevention of use of the financial system for the purpose of money-laundering (1), the Council Act of 26 July 1995 drawing up the Convention based on Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) (2) and the Council of Europe 1995 Agreement on illicit traffic by sea implementing Article 17 of the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances;Encouraging Member States which have not yet done so, to ratify the Conventions referred to above;Noting that the UN 1988 Convention requires each Party to make the commission of offences covered by Article 3 (1) thereof liable to sanctions which take into account their grave nature, such as imprisonment or other forms of deprivation of liberty, pecuniary sanctions and confiscation of the instrumentalities used in, and proceeds derived from, such offences;DECLARES that, in order to more effectively coordinate and improve the European Union's strategy for combating illicit drug-trafficking, and in particular to improve cooperation in criminal matters within this area, Member States will ensure that their national laws provide for the possibility of custodial sentences for serious illicit trafficking in drugs which are within the range of the most severe custodial penalties imposed by their respective criminal law for crimes of comparable gravity;CONSIDERS that factors which might be taken into account regarding the custodial penalties that might be applicable in relation to serious drug-trafficking could for example, include, among other factors:- the extent of the trafficking,- the extent to which the person concerned has profited from the illicit traffic,- the involvement in the offence of an organized criminal group to which the offender belongs,- the extent to which the offender has control of the drug-trafficking organization,- the victimization or use of minors;RECOMMENDS that Member States ensure that their national laws reflect the principles of this resolution;INTENDS to carry out an appropriate review of the implementation of this resolution.(1) OJ No L 166, 28. 6. 1991, p. 77.(2) OJ No C 316, 27. 11. 1995, p. 1.

Summary: Approximation of the laws of the Member States (2) Approximation of the laws of the Member States (2) 1) OBJECTIVE To more effectively coordinate and improve the European Union's strategy for combating illicit drug-trafficking and in particular to improve cooperation in criminal matters in this area. 2) ACT Council Resolution 97/C 10/02 of 20 December 1996 on sentencing for serious drug-trafficking [Official Journal C 10 of 11.1.1997]. 3) SUMMARY Member States will ensure that their national laws provide for the possibility of custodial sentences for serious illicit trafficking in drugs that are within the range of the most severe custodial penalties imposed by their respective criminal law for crimes of comparable gravity. The factors which might be taken into account regarding custodial penalties that might be applicable in relation to serious drug-trafficking could include, among other factors: the extent of the trafficking, the extent to which the person concerned has profited from the illicit traffic, the involvement in the offence of an organised criminal group to which the offender belongs, the extent to which the offender has control of the drug-trafficking organisation, the victimisation or use of minors. 4) implementing measures 5) follow-up work Last updated: 07.10.2005


EUR-Lex - 31996F0698 - EN Avis juridique important | 31996F0698 96/698/JHA: Joint Action of 29 November 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on cooperation between customs authorities and business organizations in combating drug trafficking Official Journal L 322 , 12/12/1996 P. 0003 - 0004 JOINT ACTION of 29 November 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on cooperation between customs authorities and business organizations in combating drug trafficking (96/698/JHA)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and, in particular, Article K.3 (2) (b) thereof,Having regard to the initiative of Ireland,Having regard to the report of the Expert Group on Drugs, as approved by the European Council in Madrid in 1995,Recognizing that facilities and services of legitimate business organizations can be surreptitiously used by illegal drug traffickers,Whereas the highest degree of cooperation is essential between customs authorities and business organizations in combating drug trafficking;Whereas support for the strengthening of cooperation between customs authorities and business organizations in the fight against drug trafficking was expressed by the Group of Seven (G7) at its summit meetings in London (1991) and Munich (1992);Whereas UN Economic and Social Council Resolutions 1993/41 of 27 July 1993 and 1995/18 of 24 July 1995 endorsed the use of Memoranda of Understanding as a practical means of obtaining tangible results in drug enforcement, whilst maintaining the momentum of trade facilitation;Whereas an action plan to develop systematically Memoranda of Understanding in the customs field was adopted by the Council of the World Customs Organization (WCO),Noting that the Memoranda of Understanding programme initiated by the WCO has been successful worldwide in consolidating cooperation between customs authorities and business organizations;Further noting that some Member States of the European Union have already embarked on national Memoranda of Understanding programmes with business organizations in relation to both drug trafficking and other customs offences;Aware that the expansion of these programmes to all Member States and to a greater number of business organizations can bring further enforcement advantages,HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING JOINT ACTION:Article 1 In order to consolidate the already cooperative relationship between the customs authorities of the Member States and business organizations operating in the European Union in combating drug trafficking, Member States shall establish or further develop Memoranda of Understanding programmes at national level under the guidelines laid down in this joint action and shall invite participation in such programmes.Article 2 Memoranda of Understanding between customs authorities and business organizations may contain, but need not be confined to, provisions in respect of the following:- the exchange of contact names in customs and in the signatory organization,- the provision to customs, by the signatory, of advance cargo or passenger data as appropriate,- access by customs to the signatory's information systems,- assessment by customs of the signatory's security procedures,- development and implementation of plans to improve such security,- checking of newly recruited staff by the signatory,- provision by customs of training for the signatory's staff.Article 3 Customs authorities shall periodically review the operation of national Memoranda of Understanding programmes and shall also review the implementation of individual Memoranda of Understanding and, in agreement with signatories, adapt them as necessary to ensure maximum effectiveness.Article 4 Member States shall notify the Council Secretariat of the measures they have taken to implement the provisions of this joint action one year after its entry into force and thereafter as requested by the Presidency.Article 5 Member States may at their discretion extend the scope of Memoranda of Understanding established under the programmes referred to in Article 1 to cover other offences for which the customs authorities are competent in addition to drug trafficking.Article 6 This joint action shall be published in the Official Journal.It shall enter into force on the day of its publication.Done at Brussels, 29 November 1996.For the CouncilThe PresidentN. OWEN

Summary: Cooperation between customs authorities and business organisations of the Member States Cooperation between customs authorities and business organisations of the Member States 1) OBJECTIVE To consolidate the already cooperative relationship between the customs authorities of the Member States and business organisations in combating drug trafficking. 2) ACT Joint Action 96/698/JHA of 29 November 1996, adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty of the European Union, on cooperation between customs authorities and business organisations in combating drug trafficking [Official Journal L 322 of 12.12.1996]. 3) SUMMARY In order to consolidate the already cooperative relationship between customs authorities of the business organisations operating in the European Union in combating drug trafficking, Member States will establish or further develop Memoranda of Understanding programmes at national level under the guidelines laid down in this joint action and will invite participation in such programmes. Memoranda of Understanding between customs authorities and business organisations may contain, but need not be confined to, provisions in respect of the following: the exchange of contact names in customs and in the signatory organisation; the provision to customs, by the signatory, of advance cargo or passenger data as appropriate; access by customs to the signatory's information systems; assessment by customs of the signatory's security procedures; development and implementation of plans to improve such security; checking of newly recruited staff by the signatory; provision by customs of training for the signatory's staff. Customs authorities will periodically review the operation of national Memoranda of Understanding programmes and will also review the implementation of individual Memoranda of Understanding and, in agreement with the signatories, adapt them as necessary to ensure maximum effectiveness. Member States will notify the Council Secretariat of the measures they have taken to implement the provisions of this joint action one year after its entry into force and thereafter as requested by the Presidency. Member States may at their discretion extend the scope of Memoranda of Understanding established under the programmes referred to at 1 to cover other offences for which the customs authorities are competent in addition to drug trafficking. Act Dateof entry into force Final date for implementation in the Member States Joint action 96/698/JHA 12.12.1996 - 4) implementing measures 5) follow-up work Last updated: 07.10.2005


EUR-Lex - 31996F0443 - EN Avis juridique important | 31996F0443 96/443/JHA: Joint Action of 15 July 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia Official Journal L 185 , 24/07/1996 P. 0005 - 0007 JOINT ACTION of 15 July 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia (96/443/JHA)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to Article K.3 (2) (b) of the Treaty on European Union,Having regard to the initiative from the Kingdom of Spain,Whereas the Member States regard the adoption of rules in connection with action to combat racism and xenophobia as a matter of common interest, in accordance with Article K.1 (7) of the Treaty in particular;Whereas regard should be had to the conclusions on racism and xenophobia adopted by the European Council in Corfu on 24 and 25 June 1994, in Essen on 9 and 10 December 1994, in Cannes on 26 and 27 June 1995 and in Madrid on 15 and 16 December 1995;Whereas the Consultative Commission on Racism and Xenophobia, established by the Corfu European Council, adopted recommendations;Whereas, despite the efforts made over recent years by the Member States, racism and xenophobia offences are still on the increase;Concerned at the differences between some criminal law systems regarding the punishment of specific types of racist and xenophobic behaviour, which constitute barriers to international judicial cooperation;Acknowledging that international cooperation by all States, including those which are not affected at domestic level by the problem of racism and xenophobia, is necessary to prevent the perpetrators of such offences from exploiting the fact that racist and xenophobic activities are classified differently in different States by moving from one country to another in order to escape criminal proceedings or avoid serving sentences and thus pursue their activities with impunity;Emphasizing that the right to freedom of expression implies duties and responsibilities, including respect for the rights of others, as laid down in Article 19 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 19 December 1966;Determined, in keeping with their common humanitarian tradition, to guarantee that, above all, Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950 are complied with;Wishing to build upon the work begun within the framework of Title VI of the Treaty during 1994 concerning the criminal aspects of the fight against racism and xenophobia,HAS ADOPTED THIS JOINT ACTION:TITLE IA. In the interests of combating racism and xenophobia, each Member State shall undertake, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Title II, to ensure effective judicial cooperation in respect of offences based on the following types of behaviour, and, if necessary for the purposes of that cooperation, either to take steps to see that such behaviour is punishable as a criminal offence or, failing that, and pending the adoption of any necessary provisions, to derogate from the principle of double criminality for such behaviour:(a) public incitement to discrimination, violence or racial hatred in respect of a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to colour, race, religion or national or ethnic origin;(b) public condoning, for a racist or xenophobic purpose, of crimes against humanity and human rights violations;(c) public denial of the crimes defined in Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal appended to the London Agreement of 8 April 1945 insofar as it includes behaviour which is contemptuous of, or degrading to, a group of persons defined by reference to colour, race, religion or national or ethnic origin;(d) public dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia;(e) participation in the activities of groups, organizations or associations, which involve discrimination, violence, or racial, ethnic or religious hatred.B. In the case of investigations into, and/or proceedings against, offences based on the types of behaviour listed in paragraph A, each Member State shall, in accordance with Title II, improve judicial cooperation in the following areas and take appropriate measures for:(a) seizure and confiscation of tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia intended for public dissemination, where such material is offered to the public in the territory of a Member State;(b) acknowledgement that the types of behaviour listed in paragraph A should not be regarded as political offences justifying refusal to comply with requests for mutual legal assistance;(c) providing information to another Member State to enable that Member State to initiate, in accordance with its law, legal proceedings or proceedings for confiscation in cases where it appears that tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia are being stored in a Member State for the purposes of distribution or dissemination in another Member State;(d) the establishment of contact points in the Member States which would be responsible for collecting and exchanging any information which might be useful for investigations and proceedings against offences based on the types of behaviour listed in paragraph A.C. Nothing in this Joint Action may be interpreted as affecting any obligations which Member States may have under the international instruments listed below. Member States shall implement this Joint Action consistently with such obligations and will refer to the definitions and principles contained in such instruments when so doing:- the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950,- the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967,- the United Nations Convention on Genocide of 9 December 1948,- the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966,- the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and Protocols I and II of 12 December 1977 to those Conventions,- Resolutions 827(93) and 955(94) of the United Nations Security Council,- Council Resolution of 23 November 1995 on the protection of witnesses in the fight against international organized crime (1), in cases of criminal proceedings for the types of behaviour listed in paragraph A, if witnesses have been summoned in another Member State.TITLE IIEach Member State shall bring forward appropriate proposals to implement this Joint Action for consideration by the competent authorities with a view to their adoption.The Council will assess the fulfilment by Member States of their obligations under this Joint Action, taking into account the declarations annexed to it, by the end of June 1998.This Joint Action and the annexed declarations, which are approved by the Council and are without prejudice to the application of this Joint Action by Member States other than those whom these declarations concern, will be published in the Official Journal.Done at Brussels, 15 July 1996.For the CouncilThe PresidentD. SPRING(1) OJ No C 327, 7. 12. 1995, p. 5.ANNEX DECLARATIONS REFERRED TO IN TITLE II 1. Declaration by the Greek delegation re Title I.B (b): 'Greece interprets Title I.B (b) in the light of those provisions of its Constitution which prohibit any action being taken against persons facing prosecution on political grounds.`2. Declaration by the French delegation re Title I.C, fifth indent: 'France points out that Additional Protocol I of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 cannot be invoked against it, in that France has neither ratified nor signed that instrument and that it cannot be taken as a translation of international customary law applicable in armed conflicts.`3. Declaration by the United Kingdom delegation re Title I: 'The United Kingdom delegation declares that for the purposes of the application of the Joint Action by the United Kingdom, and taking into account the provisions and general principles of United Kingdom criminal law, the United Kingdom will apply Title I, paragraph A, points (a) to (e) and references thereto where the relevant behaviour is threatening, abusive or insulting and is carried out with the intention of stirring up racial hatred or is likely to do so.This would include, in accordance with Title I.B and Title II, enabling the relevant United Kingdom authorities in this context to search for and seize tracts, pictures or other material in the UK which is intended for dissemination in another Member State and which is likely to incite racial hatred there.If problems arise from the application of this declaration, the UK will consult with the Member State concerned with a view to overcoming the problems raised.`4. Declaration by the Danish delegation re Title I: 'The Danish delegation declares that for the purposes of the application of the Joint Action by Denmark, and taking into account the provisions and general principles of Danish criminal law, Denmark will apply Title I, paragraph A, points (a) to (e) and references thereto only where the relevant behaviour is threatening, insulting or degrading.`

Summary: Joint action to combat racism and xenophobia Joint action to combat racism and xenophobia 1) OBJECTIVE To adopt rules to combat racism and xenophobia in order to prevent the perpetrators of such offences from exploiting the fact that racist and xenophobic activities are classified differently in different states by moving from one country to another in order to escape criminal proceedings or avoid serving sentences and thus pursue their activities with impunity. 2) UNION MEASURE Joint action/96/443/JHA of 15 July 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia. 3) CONTENT In the interests of combating racism and xenophobia, each Member State must undertake, in accordance with the procedure laid down in point 4, to ensure effective judicial cooperation in respect of offences based on the following types of behaviour, and, if necessary, for the purposes of that cooperation, to take steps to see that such behaviour is punishable as a criminal offence: public incitement to discrimination, violence or racial hatred in respect of a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to colour, race, religion or national or ethnic origin; public condoning, for a racist or xenophobic purpose, of crimes against humanity and human rights violations; public denial of the crimes defined in Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal appended to the London Agreement of 8 April 1945 insofar as it includes behaviour which is contemptuous of, or degrading to, a group of persons defined by reference to colour, race, religion or national or ethnic origin; public dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia; participation in the activities of groups, organisations or associations, which involve discrimination, violence, or racial, ethnic or religious hatred. In the case of investigations into, and/or proceedings against, offences based on the types of behaviour listed above, each Member State must, in accordance with point 3, improve judicial cooperation in the following areas and take appropriate measures for: seizure and confiscation of tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia intended for public dissemination, where such material is offered to the public in the territory of a Member State; acknowledgement that the types of behaviour listed in point 1 should not be regarded as political offences justifying refusal to comply with requests for mutual legal assistance; providing information to another Member State to enable that Member State to initiate, in accordance with its law, legal proceedings or proceedings for confiscation in cases where it appears that tracts, pictures or other material containing expressions of racism and xenophobia are being stored in a Member State for the purposes of distribution or dissemination in another Member State; the establishment of contact points in the Member States which would be responsible for collecting and exchanging any information which might be useful for investigations and proceedings against offences based on the types of behaviour listed in point 1. Nothing in this Joint Action may be interpreted as affecting any obligations which Member States may have under the international instruments listed below. Member States must implement this Joint Action consistently with such obligations and will refer to the definitions and principles contained in such instruments when so doing: the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950, the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967, the United Nations Convention on Genocide of 9 December 1948, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966, the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and Protocols I and II of 12 December 1977 to those Conventions, Resolutions 827(93) and 955(94) of the United Nations Security Council, Council Resolution of 23 November 1995 on the protection of witnesses in the fight against international organised crime (1), in cases of criminal proceedings for the types of behaviour listed in point 1, if witnesses have been summoned in another Member State. Each Member State must bring forward appropriate proposals to implement this joint action for consideration by the competent authorities with a view to their adoption. 4) deadline for implementation of the legislation in the member states 5) date of entry into force (if different from the above) 13.08.1996 6) references Official Journal L 185 of 24.07.1996 7) follow-up work 8) implementing measures Last updated: 27.07.2005


EUR-Lex - 31996F0277 - EN Avis juridique important | 31996F0277 96/277/JHA: Joint Action of 22 April 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning a framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates to improve judicial cooperation between the Member States of the European Union Official Journal L 105 , 27/04/1996 P. 0001 - 0002 JOINT ACTION of 22 April 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning a framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates to improve judicial cooperation between the Member States of the European Union (96/277/JHA)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to Article K.3 (2) (b) of the Treaty on European Union,Having regard to the initiative of the Italian Republic,Whereas the Member States consider that they have a common interest in adopting measures to improve judicial cooperation, in both criminal and civil matters;Whereas, to that end, the exchange of magistrates or officials to liaise between the Member States which so wish constitutes a useful and desirable measure;Whereas the exchange of liaison magistrates of officials could increase the speed and effectiveness of judicial cooperation and at the same time facilitate better mutual understanding between Member States' legal and judicial systems;Whereas more effective judicial cooperation in criminal matters could also help in effectively combating all forms of transnational crime, particularly organized crime and terrorism as well as fraud affecting the financial interests of the Community;Whereas this joint action does not affect existing rules of procedure for judicial cooperation or exchanges of information between the Member States and the Commission based on other instruments;Taking a positive view of the initiatives already undertaken by a number of Member States in sending liaison magistrates or officials to or receiving them from authorities competent for judicial cooperation and current initiatives to establish an effective network of judicial contact points to combat international organized crime;Having considered the need to define a clear and useful judicial framework for initiatives already under way in order to increase their effectiveness and promote coordination,HAS ADOPTED THIS JOINT ACTION;Article 1Exchange of liaison magistrates 1. This joint action establishes a framework for the posting or the exchange of magistrates of officials with special expertise in judicial cooperation procedures hereafter, referred to as 'liaison magistrates`, as between Member States, on the basis of bilateral or multilateral arrangements.2. The Member States agree that, the guidelines laid down in this joint action will serve as a reference when they decide to send liaison magistrates to another Member State or to exchange liaison magistrates.3. The main aim of creating a framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates is to increase the speed and effectiveness of judicial cooperation and to promote the pooling of information on the legal and judicial systems of the Member States and to improve their operation.Article 2Functions of liaison magistrates 1. The tasks of liaison magistrates shall normally include any activity designed to encourage and accelerate all forms of judicial cooperation in criminal and, where appropriate, civil matters, in particular by establishing direct links with the competent departments and judicial authorities of the host State.2. Under arrangements agreed between the home Member State and the host Member State, liaison magistrates' tasks may also include any activity connected with handling the exchange of information and statistics designed to promote mutual understanding of the legal systems and legal data bases of the States concerned and to further relations between the legal professions of each of those States.Article 3Exchange of information Member States shall keep each other informed within the Council of initiatives already under way and those taken to implement this joint action. The Member States concerned shall forward information on their exchanges of liaison magistrates to the General Secretariat of the Council annually.Article 4Final provision This joint action shall be published in the Official Journal and shall enter into force on the date of its publication.Done at Luxembourg, 22 April 1996.For the CouncilThe PresidentS. AGNELLI

Summary: Framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates Framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates In light of the differences between Member States' legal and judicial systems, the Council has adopted an act to increase the speed and effectiveness of judicial cooperation and at the same time facilitate better mutual understanding between systems. Judicial cooperation is the main instrument in combating international crime and fraud, in particular fraud affecting the Community's financial interests. ACT Joint Action 96/277/JHA of 22 April 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning a framework for the exchange of liaison magistrates to improve judicial cooperation between the Member States of the European Union. SUMMARY The Joint Action establishes a framework for the posting or the exchange of magistrates or officials with special expertise in judicial cooperation procedures, referred to as 'liaison magistrates', between Member States, on the basis of bilateral or multilateral arrangements. The tasks of liaison magistrates shall normally include any activity designed to encourage and accelerate all forms of judicial cooperation in criminal and, where appropriate, civil matters, in particular by establishing direct links with the relevant departments and judicial authorities in the host State. Under arrangements agreed between the home Member State and the host Member State, liaison magistrates' tasks may also include any activity connected with handling the exchange of information and statistics designed to promote mutual understanding of the legal systems and legal data bases of the States concerned and to further relations between the legal professions in each of those States. Member States shall keep each other informed within the Council of initiatives already under way and those taken to implement this Joint Action. The Member States concerned shall forward information on their exchanges of liaison magistrates to the General Secretariat of the Council annually. References Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal Joint Action 96/277/JHA 27.4.1996 - OJ L 105 of 27.4.1996 See also European Judicial Network (EJN) Last updated: 16.05.2007


EUR-Lex - 31996Y0318(01) - EN Avis juridique important | 31996Y0318(01) Council recommendation of 4 March 1996 relating to local consular cooperation regarding visas Official Journal C 080 , 18/03/1996 P. 0001 - 0001 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONof 4 March 1996relating to local consular cooperation regarding visas(96/C 80/01)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article K.1 (3) thereof, Whereas it is advisable to prepare for greater harmonization in the policy and practice of the issue of visas; Whereas the issue of visas, pending the possible preparation of joint instructions on the matter, is governed by each Member State's national legislation; Whereas each Member State, when issuing its own visas, should have the necessary information to take account of the interests of the other Member States, in particular the protection of national security and public order and the prevention of clandestine immigration, HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES: in so far as the practical need is felt, take the measures necessary to facilitate that: 1. the Member States' consular services should maintain local cooperation on visas, involving an exchange of information on the criteria for issuing visas and an exchange of information on risks to national security and public order or the risk of clandestine immigration; 2. the Heads of their consular services and their assistants in visa matters should hold meetings for the purposes of exchanging the information referred to in paragraph 1; 3. their consular services should organize mutual visits of officials responsible for issuing visas in order to improve the exchange of information and reciprocal knowledge; 4. at the request of the Council, their consular services should draw up joint reports on local visa issues which are likely to be relevant to the Council's discussions; 5. their consular services should adopt any appropriate joint measures to establish the existence of simultaneous visa applications or a series of applications, and, if need be, to ascertain any earlier visa refusal by another Member State; 6. their consular services should exchange information to help to determine the good faith of visa applicants and their reputation, it being understood that the fact that the applicant has obtained a visa for another Member State does not exempt the authorities of the other Member States from their responsibility to examine individually the visa application and perform the verification required for purposes of security, public order and clandestine immigration control. The exchange of information provided for in this recommendation must take the relevant data protection rules into account. Done at Brussels, 4 March 1996. For the CouncilThe PresidentP. BARATTA

Summary: Local consular cooperation regarding visas Local consular cooperation regarding visas The aim of this recommendation is to facilitate the exchanges of information on visa-related matters between the consular services of European Union (EU) countries, with a view to harmonising policy and practice regarding the issuing of visas. ACT Council recommendation of 4 March 1996 relating to local consular cooperation regarding visas [Official Journal C 80 of 18.3.1996]. SUMMARY When necessary for practical reasons, European Union (EU) countries are encouraged to establish cooperation between their consular services in order to exchange information: on the criteria for issuing visas; on risks to national security and public order or on the risks of illegal immigration; to help determine the good faith of visa applicants and their reputation. The relevant rules on data protection apply to these exchanges of information. To facilitate these exchanges of information, the consular services should organise: meetings between the Heads of consular services and their assistants responsible for visa matters; mutual visits of their officials that are responsible for issuing visas. Furthermore, EU countries’ consular services should draw up joint reports regarding any relevant local level visa-related issues, at the request of the Council. They should also adopt the necessary joint measures for determining whether any simultaneous visa applications have been made and whether another EU country has previously refused a particular visa application. RELATED ACTS Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code) [Official Journal L 243 of 15.9.2009]. Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 concerning the Visa Information System (VIS) and the exchange of data between Member States on short-stay visas (VIS Regulation) [Official Journal L 218 of 13.8.2008]. Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement [Official Journal L 81 of 21.3.2001]. Last updated: 16.03.2011