EU CITIZEN RIGHTS
By Mamunur Rahman
ID: W1570413
Course: Finance
Tutor: Anthony Boyt & Sobia Razzaq
Westminster University
18th March 2018
EU CITIZEN RIGHTS
The freedom of movement for workers as well as the general EU citizens has been an important right of the citizens. The mode of liberty makes EU unique regarding economic integration. However, the EU common market was marked by crisis based on the events of 2004 and 2007 when new members joined the union. The main issue was that many individuals have been moving to the EU in search of jobs. The problem is intensified with the fact that citizens in other old member countries such as the Greece, Italy, and Portugal had been moving to other member countries in search of jobs. The problem is that some of these citizens only move to other member countries to enjoy higher living standards without the intention of working to improve the economies of these countries. In December 2013 there was widespread dispute over the decision to terminate the restrictions imposed on Romanian and Bulgarian citizens to seek employment in some member countries. The move was feared to trigger excessive immigration. This report evaluates the extent to which EU laws allow people from other member countries to move between the countries and the rights that these people follow.
The pie charts above show how EU citizens have been moving in and out of different EU member countries. In April of the year 2013 four ministers of EU member countries presented letters to the Irish where they complained about the impact of the social welfare systems and how they are prone to being misused. The freedom of movement has been questioned on many occasions with some EU member countries saying their dissatisfaction. The aspect of “benefit tourism” has been subjected to a lot of discussions. One area of dispute has been the topic of social solidarity among the EU member countries mainly with the issue of equal treatment provision. Various countries have said that the similar treatment conditions have had opposing effects on the welfare schemes of member countries. The blame has in many cases be directed to the CJEU which has allowed non-economical EU citizens to enjoy social benefits mostly by allowing the Treaty provisions for the freedom of movement.
The free movement of workers in Europe is mandated by the law and safeguarded under the Article 45 TFEU, furthermore the situation if further validated by the Article 34(2) for the EU charter of fundamental rights. The law was implemented in good faith and is aimed at guaranteeing that citizens were not mistreated while moving in and out of EU member countries. The objective was to promote free trade and the comfort of workers regardless of the EU member country that they chose to live and work.
Regarding residence in another EU country, individuals have the right to live in another country for three months can be allowed to live in a member country if they meet two primary conditions. The first aspect is to have a job in the host countries. The other requirement is that they should have enough resources for themselves and their households and a complete sickness insurance cover to eliminate the possibility of them being a liability in the host country.
For a worker in any EU country, they are guided by the EU laws and not necessarily the national law of member countries. Therefore, they are liable to enjoy minimum wages and minimum working hours which are speculated by the EU to ensure best benefits from the freedom of movement. Therefore, the basis that a person works on the part time basis or even on a contract does not disqualify them from being regarded as workers and as such they are safeguarded by the free movement laws. However, Article 35 of the Free Movement Directive allows EU countries to withhold any rights to individuals who are detected to have used fraud in a bid to enjoy the welfare arrangements in an EU member country. Therefore, to avoid too much pressure on host countries, EU citizens who are not economically active can only be allowed residency in a member country if they provide proof that they have adequate resources for themselves and their households. They should also have good medical insurance coverage to ensure that they do not end up being a burden to the social assistance programs in the country. The resources available to a migrant do not have to be in the host country and could also originate from a third party.
The Free movement directive dictates that the unemployed and the jobseekers cannot be regarded to be economically inactive EU citizens and as such the condition of having the adequate resource or a comprehensive medical cover does not apply. However, the host country is allowed to expel an individual from a member country if they are sure that they will not be able to get jobs. Job seekers are, therefore, given six months to search for employment. EU citizens who are found to have lived in a country for more than five years are entitled to the right of residency without having to satisfy other criteria such as being self-sufficient. This move was implemented with the aim of fostering integration in the EU.
There is a directive for the expulsion of EU citizens which is complemented by the re-entry regulations. The member countries are allowed to expel a resident if they term him/her to be a burdensome migrant. However, the burden in question ought to be severe enough to warrant the expulsion. However, there are various factors that are evaluated before such a decision is enforced such as the age of the individual, duration of his/her residence and if there is a history of relying on social systems provided in that country. However, it’s important to note that even if an individual is found to be liable and expelled from a country on the grounds of sufficiency, yet it is quite difficult to enforce a re-entry ban. The reason is that such a situation is foreseen and covered by the Article 15(3) of the Free Movement Directive. The article explains that exclusion can only be imposed on pressing issues such as endangering the public regarding policies, security issues or health.
Bibliography
Craig, P. and De Búrca, G., 2015. EU law: text, cases, and materials, 6th edition. Oxford University Press.
Kaczorowska-Ireland, A., 2016. European union law. Routledge.
O’leary, S., 2009. Equal treatment and EU citizens: A new chapter on cross-border educational mobility and access to student financial assistance. European Law Review, 34(4), pp.612-27.
Reynolds, S., 2013. Exploring the" intrinsic connection" between free movement and the genuine enjoyment test: reflections on EU citizenship after Iida. European law review, (3), pp.376-392.
Thym, D., 2015. The Elusive Limits of Solidarity. Residence Rights of and Social Benefits for Economically Inactive Union Citizens.
Verschueren, H., 2015. Preventing" benefit tourism" in the EU: a narrow or broad interpretation of the possibilities offered by the ECJ in DANO?. Common Market Law Review, 52(2), pp.363-390.
Weatherill, S., 2014. Cases and materials on EU law. Oxford University Press, USA.
Weatherill, S., 2016. Cases and materials on EU law 12th edition. Oxford University Press, USA.