Social Policy Agenda

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality

2002/0110(COS)

26 June 2002

OPINION

of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality

to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.

Proposal for a Council Regulation on international jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility, which repeals Regulation (EC) No. 1347/2000 and amends Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 concerning maintenance matters

(COM(2002) 0222 – C5‑0234/2002 – 2002/0110((COS))

Draftswoman: Anna Karamanou

HISTORY OF THE PROCEDURE

At its meeting on 22 May 2002, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality appointed Anna Karamanou as rapporteur for the opinion.

At its meetings on 17 and 18 June 2002, the committee examined the draft opinion.

At the last-mentioned meeting, the committee unanimously approved the following amendments.

The following Members were present during the vote: Olga Zrihen Zaari, presiding; Jillian Evans, acting vice-chair; Anna Karamanou, rapporteur for the opinion; Maria Antonia Avilés Perea, Regina Bastos, Lissy Gröner, Mary Honeyball, Miet Smet, Elena Valenciano Martinez-Orozco, Olle Schmidt.

SUMMARY OF THE RATIONALE

The creation of a harmonized and unified judicial area within the European Union is based on the mutual recognition of judicial decisions across all Member States. This is a genuine necessity at the current stage of European integration, as borders between Member States are being abolished and the free movement of persons makes the European Union a single territory, and thus a single judicial area. This applies not only to matters within the competence of the EU but also to issues that were previously regulated exclusively within national borders, such as the area of family law.

The mutual recognition of judgments in matters of divorce, legal separation, annulment of marriage, and parental responsibility is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No. 1347/2000, which entered into force in March 2001; matters concerning maintenance are governed by Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001. The Commission initially proposed a different regulation to govern the recognition and enforcement of judicial decisions in matters of parental responsibility, aiming to abolish the complex requirements for enforcement in another Member State (the abolition of exequatur). Additionally, there was a proposal to regulate issues related to child abduction (French initiative). As a result, the Commission decided to propose the creation of a single legal instrument covering all of these areas. The European Parliament agreed with this initiative, and the present proposal is the outcome of this decision.

Therefore, the proposed regulation aims to strike a balance between ensuring that judicial decisions always reflect the best interests of the child and the ability to have decisions made in one Member State recognized throughout the European Union. For this reason, it should be supported by the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, provided that due consideration is given to the weaker economic and social position of women who are entitled to parental responsibility.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality calls on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, which is responsible for the substance, to incorporate the following amendments into its report:

Text proposed by the Committee ^[1]

Amendments of the Parliament.

Amendment 1

Recital 8a (new)

(8a) In cases of divorce, legal separation, or annulment of marriage, parental responsibility is most often granted to mothers who, as has been demonstrated, are generally in a weaker financial position than men, and this serious obstacle should be taken into account.

Justification

Cross-border recognition of judicial decisions often involves significant costs and efforts; however, this should not prevent parents who lack financial or other means from seeking the return of their child. Moreover, it is statistically proven that women are in a weaker financial position than men, especially when they have responsibility for the child or children following a legal separation, annulment of marriage, or divorce.

Amendment 2

Recital 12a (new)

(12a) In order to facilitate easier contact with the competent authorities, which is in the best interest of the child, appropriate support, such as basic legal training, should be provided to parents who need it, particularly those with the least experience in such interactions.

Justification

The return of the child in cases of abduction or wrongful denial of access requires a good understanding of parental responsibility rights and the child’s rights, as well as the ability to assert these rights with the competent authorities. Parents or holders of parental responsibility should not be deprived of their right to act due to lack of experience or basic knowledge in this area.

Amendment 3

Article 12, paragraph 1, point (c)

(c) international jurisdiction of the courts has been accepted by the spouses and is in line with the best interests of the child.

(c) the international jurisdiction of the courts has been accepted by the spouses with full knowledge of the consequences and is in line with the best interests of the child.

Justification

The courts must make clear the consequences of accepting their jurisdiction and ensure that the parents or holders of parental responsibility fully understand these consequences.

Amendment 4

Article 12, paragraph 2, point (a)

(a) all holders of parental responsibility have accepted the jurisdiction at the time the appeal was lodged;

(a) all holders of parental responsibility have accepted the jurisdiction at the time the appeal was lodged, provided that they have fully understood the consequences of this acceptance;

Justification

The courts must make clear the consequences of accepting their jurisdiction and ensure that the parents or holders of parental responsibility fully understand these consequences.

Amendment 5

Article 16, point (b) (new)

(b)a. if the failure to take the required actions is due to the applicant’s lack of legal knowledge;

Justification

If the applicant has not taken the required actions due to a lack of understanding of the requirements, the procedure, or the language, the spouse or child should not be deprived of their rights; the courts must ascertain whether the failure to take the required actions is due to a lack of understanding and should facilitate the applicant.

Amendment 6

Article 25, paragraph 2a (new)

2a. The central authorities must provide appropriate support and advice to parents who, due to unwillingness or moral or financial incapacity, are prevented from engaging with the official procedures and legal requirements.

Justification

^[1] ΕΕ C ….