The Scope of Union Citizenship: The Case of Non-Economically Active Persons
(2007)Department of Law
- Abstract
- Following the introduction of Union citizenship by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993, the ECJ has emphasised that: ''Union citizenship is destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States''. This marks a move away from the initial focus on ''market citizens'' in a Community primarily aimed at facilitating cross-border economic activity: a system, which thus did not pay much attention to the rights of non-economically active persons, not to mention rights of third-country nationals. Non-economically active persons consequently have a right to free movement within the EU. In principle, Union citizenship has thus filled the gap between the two groups of Member State nationals, leaving behind third-country nationals... (More)
- Following the introduction of Union citizenship by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993, the ECJ has emphasised that: ''Union citizenship is destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States''. This marks a move away from the initial focus on ''market citizens'' in a Community primarily aimed at facilitating cross-border economic activity: a system, which thus did not pay much attention to the rights of non-economically active persons, not to mention rights of third-country nationals. Non-economically active persons consequently have a right to free movement within the EU. In principle, Union citizenship has thus filled the gap between the two groups of Member State nationals, leaving behind third-country nationals residents in the EU, in that Union citizenship is fully dependant on Member State nationality. The establishment of Union citizenship therefore raises two questions&semic on one hand, whether this right to free movement, given to all Member States nationals, is an equal right or if ''market citizens'' continue to enjoy a more privileged position. On the other hand, it raises questions concerning the status of third-country nationals lawfully residing in the EU. These to aspects constitute the focus-point of the present thesis, albeit with emphasis on the rights and level of protection afforded non-economically active Union citizens. Firstly, this implies an examination of the right to move and reside pursuant to Art. 18 EC together with the 2004 Residence Directive. The ECJ has given Art. 18 direct effect. The provision thus grants every union citizen a right to reside in any of the Member States, albeit limited by the Residence Directive, which requires that non-economically active Union citizens have sufficient resources to support themselves. Secondly, Union citizenship has resulted in non-economically active Union citizens being covered by the prohibition of discrimination in Art. 12 EC. This implies that non- economically active Union citizens lawfully residing in another Member State can claim social benefits that fall ratione materiae within the scope of the application of the EC Treaty. In addition, the latest case law of the ECJ indicates that it is moving towards a prohibition of restrictions in the area of free movement of non-economically active Union citizens. A prohibition of restriction is however not fully applicable, albeit the ECJ will take action against national legislation that hinders the free movement of non-economically active Union citizens. Conversely, the EC Treaty does not grant independent rights to free movement in the EU for third-country nationals. Their right to move and reside will merely be derived&semic either as spouses, workers etc. The status and rights of this group of persons follows from secondary legislation, which grants certain privileges to them and extends the right to reside in the EU, as well as the Residence Directive holds a possibility to obtain independent rights. Furthermore, the case law of the ECJ seems to show a tendency of slowly broadening the scope of protection of third-country national residents in the EU, e.g. in relation to the right to vote at elections to the European Parliament. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1555158
- author
- Lindgaard, Gitte
- supervisor
- organization
- year
- 2007
- type
- H1 - Master's Degree (One Year)
- subject
- keywords
- European Affairs
- language
- English
- id
- 1555158
- date added to LUP
- 2010-03-08 15:22:59
- date last changed
- 2010-03-08 15:22:59
@misc{1555158,
abstract = {{Following the introduction of Union citizenship by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993, the ECJ has emphasised that: ''Union citizenship is destined to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States''. This marks a move away from the initial focus on ''market citizens'' in a Community primarily aimed at facilitating cross-border economic activity: a system, which thus did not pay much attention to the rights of non-economically active persons, not to mention rights of third-country nationals. Non-economically active persons consequently have a right to free movement within the EU. In principle, Union citizenship has thus filled the gap between the two groups of Member State nationals, leaving behind third-country nationals residents in the EU, in that Union citizenship is fully dependant on Member State nationality. The establishment of Union citizenship therefore raises two questions&semic on one hand, whether this right to free movement, given to all Member States nationals, is an equal right or if ''market citizens'' continue to enjoy a more privileged position. On the other hand, it raises questions concerning the status of third-country nationals lawfully residing in the EU. These to aspects constitute the focus-point of the present thesis, albeit with emphasis on the rights and level of protection afforded non-economically active Union citizens. Firstly, this implies an examination of the right to move and reside pursuant to Art. 18 EC together with the 2004 Residence Directive. The ECJ has given Art. 18 direct effect. The provision thus grants every union citizen a right to reside in any of the Member States, albeit limited by the Residence Directive, which requires that non-economically active Union citizens have sufficient resources to support themselves. Secondly, Union citizenship has resulted in non-economically active Union citizens being covered by the prohibition of discrimination in Art. 12 EC. This implies that non- economically active Union citizens lawfully residing in another Member State can claim social benefits that fall ratione materiae within the scope of the application of the EC Treaty. In addition, the latest case law of the ECJ indicates that it is moving towards a prohibition of restrictions in the area of free movement of non-economically active Union citizens. A prohibition of restriction is however not fully applicable, albeit the ECJ will take action against national legislation that hinders the free movement of non-economically active Union citizens. Conversely, the EC Treaty does not grant independent rights to free movement in the EU for third-country nationals. Their right to move and reside will merely be derived&semic either as spouses, workers etc. The status and rights of this group of persons follows from secondary legislation, which grants certain privileges to them and extends the right to reside in the EU, as well as the Residence Directive holds a possibility to obtain independent rights. Furthermore, the case law of the ECJ seems to show a tendency of slowly broadening the scope of protection of third-country national residents in the EU, e.g. in relation to the right to vote at elections to the European Parliament.}},
author = {{Lindgaard, Gitte}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{The Scope of Union Citizenship: The Case of Non-Economically Active Persons}},
year = {{2007}},
}