Commission v Netherlands [2007]
In this case, a number of EU citizens were sentenced to imprisonment in the Netherlands. They complained to the Commission about the measures taken against them by the Dutch authorities declaring them undesirable on public policy grounds.
After examining those complaints, the Commission concluded that the general legislation of the Netherlands relating to foreign nationals, which was equally applicable to nationals of other Member States, made it possible to establish a systematic and automatic connection between a criminal conviction and a measure ordering expulsion from the territory.
The ECJ started its reasoning by reiterating that EU citizenship was destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States. After that it ruled that the situation in this case was not consistent with Directive 64/221.
In fact, the ECJ by continuing its reasoning on Article 18 EC Treaty reminded that a national of a Member State might, simply by virtue of being an EU citizen, enjoy a right of residence in another Member State. The ECJ held however that this right was not unconditional. Among the limitations and conditions, Directive 64/221 permitted Member States to expel nationals of other Member States from their territory on grounds of public policy or public security, subject to compliance with the substantive and procedural safeguards laid down by that directive and with the general principles of Community law.
An interpretation to the effect that the provisions of Directive 64/221 applied only to citizens of the Union who were lawfully resident on the territory of the host Member State was not consistent with Community law.
According to the ECJ, EC law also precludes provisions of national law based on a presumption that nationals of other Member States who have received a particular sentence for specific offences must be expelled.
The ECJ conclusion was that the national legislation made it possible to establish a systematic and automatic connection between a criminal conviction and a measure ordering expulsion in respect of EU citizens.The Netherlands thereby failed to fulfill its obligations under Directive 64/221.
November 21st, 2007 at 2:55 pm
First, interpretation of the boundaries to which a Member State extend the “public security” reasons without getting in contradiction with the reserved right of the Commission to interpret this concept is questionable.
As long as the public security is a matter of interpretation exlusively in the domestic law of the given country, the rights that are derived from this matter should also be interpreted by the domestic law first and not in the frame of the Communities law, unless explicitey provided so in Treaties or Directives.
On the other hand, according to the judgement, the “automatic connection” is “possible” (then, not proven at the time of the judgement). Seen from this point, the judgement apparentely leaves the interpretation of the reason for expulsion to the given domestic Court, anyway.
There is not enough to state that it is possible, it should be proven that the case brought to the instance was causally related to that “possibility” - I did not found this demonstration in the rationale of the judgement.