Vienna, 05/06/2000 (Agence Europe) - In a letter to the Heads of State and Government of the other fourteen EU Member States, Chancellor Schüssel presented a proposal to the IGC (it has to be debated by the Seixas da Costa group on 6 June) aiming to "reformulate Article 7" of the EC Treaty, on measures to be considered with regard to a Member State that is in breach of the fundamental principals of the EU outlined in Article 6. The aim of the proposal is, in particular, to give to the State "confronted" with reproaches of such gravity, the possibility to express its opinion in the framework of the EU 15, at all the stages of the proceedings." According to Vienna, this requires that the Council have a debate on this issue, that the European Parliament give its assent, and that the proceedings (which can be started by the European Commission and/or one third of the Member States, as foreseen in the present Article 7: Ed.) contains an "obligation for justification" and be based on "proven facts" (general allusions are insufficient, said Austria in its three page document).
In the justification of its proposal, Austria asserts in particular that: - the noting of a danger of violation or the existence of an infringement of Treaty must be taken at the highest level, by the Heads of State and Government unanimously moving (without taking into account the position of the State concerned), while the enforcement measures and the preparation or accompanying debates will take place at Council level; - in case of a danger of a breach of the Treaty, the Council may make recommendations to the Member State concerned, while additional measures may only be imposed in case of a breach noted in one or other case, a regular re-examination of this situation must be ensured, notably to be able to remove the recommendations or measures applied (on request from the country affected, the Commission or one third country, the Council; noted in this case, with the majority of its members, that the violation no longer exists), the principal of proportionality must always be respected; - the proceedings must be submitted for monitoring by the Court of Justice.
Therefore the new Article 7 should, according to Austria, foresee two types of proceedings:
1. So as to avoid a serious and persistent violations of the principals outlined in Article 6, the proceedings (a form of "pre-alert": Ed.) would include: - in the case of objectively founded danger of "infringements of these principals" a Council debate, with the participation of the Member State concerned and on the basis of a Commission report, on request from the Commission or one third of the Member States; - if necessary, a confirmation that this danger exists, unanimously made by the Council at Head of State and Government level, on the basis of a motivated proposal by the Commission or one third of the Member States, after having heard the country concerned and after agreement from the European Parliament; - a qualified majority decision of the Council, on request from the Commission or one third of the Member States and after having heard the country concerned, aiming to address appropriate recommendations to the latter.
2. In the case where an "objectively proven infringement" of the principals of Article 6 is upheld by the by the Commission or one third of the Member States, the proceedings would be the following: - the Council deliberates, under similar conditions to those foreseen in the first case; - the Council at the Heads of State and Government level notes if necessary, that such an infringement exists (in addition to the conditions foreseen in the first case, Austria proposes that the decision by the European Council is based on a report by the Commission); - if the assessment occurred, the Council can decide by qualified majority, on the suggestion by the Commission or one third of the Member States, and after having heard the country concerned, to suspend certain rights stemming from the implementation of the EU Treaty in this Member States, including the voting rights of the country's government representative within the Council. The obligations that stem from the Treaty, for the Member State concerned, remain in all cases binding, specified the Austrian proposal.