FRANET Short Thematic Report Contribution to FRA Fundamental Rights Report 2017 & Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in Spain

(1)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

FRANET GUIDELINES

Short Thematic Report Contribution to FRA Fundamental Rights 2017

&

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Please note that these guidelines require the participation of the projet manager and the senior expert to a meeting at FRA premises and the submission of two separate deliverables. A Short Thematic Report on Contribution to the FRA Fundamental Rights 2017 and an Information request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. You are kindly requested to use the appropriate submission forms and evaluation sheets for each deliverable.

(2)

Guidelines for Short Thematic Report Contribution to the

FRA Fundamental Rights 2017

Timeline

30 September 2016 Meeting at FRA premises with FRANET project managers and senior experts

7 October 2016 Short Thematic Report delivered to FRA

24 October 2016 FRA comments (request for revisions)

5 December 2016 Revised and updated Short Thematic Report (incl. major developments that occurred in October-November 2016) delivered to FRA

13 December 2016 FRA comments (request for revisions)

9 January 2017 Revised and updated Short Thematic Report (incl. major developments that occurred in December 2016) delivered to FRA

16 January 2017 FRA comments (if needed)

26 January 2016 Final Short Thematic Report delivered to FRA (if needed)

Length of Short Thematic Report: maximum 15 A4-pages (excluding annexes). Reporting period: 1 Jan 2016 – 31 Dec 2016, unless otherwise specified.

1. Context, scope and purpose of the Short Thematic Report

This deliverable forms part of the background material for FRA’s Fundamental Rights on the situation of fundamental rights in the EU in 2016.

It should provide data and information on important developments in 2016 in the following areas:

1. Equality and non-discrimination

2. Racism, xenophobia and related intolerance 3. Roma integration

4. Asylum and borders; migration and integration 5. Information society, data protection

6. Rights of the child

7. Access to justice including rights of crime victims

8. Developments in the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

2. How should the data be presented

The Annual Report is drafted in-house by FRA staff on the basis of data and information by FRANET and other sources. FRANET input must be reliable and fully substantiated with reference to original sources. FRANET contractors are therefore requested to provide concise, factual and fully referenced input.

Balanced, neutral language must be used throughout the deliverable avoiding jargon. All data and information should be presented with a particular focus on their relevance to fundamental

(4)

rights. References to media sources should only be used exceptionally and only if no other sources are available.

Please read FRA’s Fundamental Rights report 2016, available at: http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2016/fundamental-rights-report-2016 in order to understand better the type of data and information used.

You are encouraged to use the services of different experts with specific experience for each of the thematic areas. The senior expert is responsible for the scientific quality of the report overall, in particular ensuring that information provided in one section is not repeated in others, but cross-referenced.

3. Sources

Consult and reference sources that refer to the year 2016 or that were published in 2016, unless otherwise specified. These sources shall include:

 data and information from governmental sources, public institutions, national parliaments, equality bodies, national human rights institutions, ombudspersons. Ensure that enough time is given to the aforementioned bodies and organisations to provide you with the requested information;

 national legislation;

 national case law or European case law relevant for your country;

 reports by civil society organisations, including NGOs, academic and research institutes, etc.

When quoting results or data from fieldwork research, briefly specify, where available: methodology; sampled population and sample size; funding body; institution that carried out the research.

4. Central requirements to be taken into account when drafting the report:

 Please identify only important developments.  Provide exact dates for any developments and events.

 Identify, if available, promising practices per thematic area, filling in Annex 1 of the Short Thematic Report.

 Identify, if available, one decision by a national high court per thematic area by filling in Annex 2 of the Short Thematic Report.

 In case no data are available, please keep the structure, do not delete subheadings and explain in the evaluation sheet why the data is not available and the steps taken to collect the data: desk research; requests to competent authorities, etc. (letters, phone calls, interviews, emails, etc.).

5.

Referencing

The data and information provided must be substantiated, and, as far as possible, supported by evidence from official sources, which should be fully referenced in a footnote, according to the FRA Style Guide. Do not include a bibliography at the end of the deliverable. References to

media sources should only be used exceptionally and only if original sources cannot be identified.

Please use the Annual Report submission template, complete the Annual Report evaluation sheet and address the following questions.

(5)

Chapter 1. Equality and non-discrimination

1. Legal and policy developments in your country in 2016 relevant to Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Please briefly describe significant legal and policy developments in your country in 2016 relevant to Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, except as regards sexual orientation (covered under question 3 below) and racial and ethnic discrimination (covered under the section Racism, Xenophobia and related intolerance). When describing these developments, please consider data and information presented in section 2.4 EU and Member States take action to counter discrimination of FRA’s Fundamental Rights Report 2016.

Please always clearly specify which ground of discrimination the developments you describe relate to.

2. Multiple and intersectional discrimination

Please briefly describe significant legal and policy developments in your country in 2016 relevant to addressing multiple and intersectional discrimination. When describing these developments, please consider Section 5.2.7 of FRA’s report on Fundamental rights: challenges and achievements in 2012.

3. Legal and policy developments relevant to sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or the fundamental rights of intersex persons

Briefly describe significant legal and policy developments in your country in 2016 relevant to sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or the fundamental rights of intersex persons.

Promising practice1_{(annex 1): Please identify and briefly describe one promising practice} tackling multiple and intersectional discrimination or on any of the grounds listed in Article 21 of the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision addressing multiple

and intersectional discrimination, if available or discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

1 The promising practice should be selected based on the following criteria: being sustainable, having concrete measurable impact, being transferable to other settings and to other Member states, and providing for review and

(6)

Chapter 2. Racism, xenophobia and related intolerance

1. Please identify the following legal and policy developments adopted in your country in 2016 in regards to:

a) efforts made by state actors and national human rights bodies with regard to the application of the Racial Equality Directive (for example on awareness raising, strengthening the role of Equality bodies). To guide you, please consult the European Commission joint report on the application of the Equality Directives.

b) efforts made by state actors and national human rights bodies with regard to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia. To guide you, please consult the European Commission’s report on implementation of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia , particularly the suggested practices to strengthen its implementation, pp. 9–10. c) efforts by public authorities and human rights bodies to address all bias motivations underlying hate crime (also those not covered by the Framework decision on Racism and Xenophobia).

2. Strategies or actions plans to counter racism and xenophobia

Considering Article 2.1.a of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination complete the table below on strategies or actions plans at national level from public authorities and public institutions in place in 2016 to counter racism and xenophobia. In your reporting please also include strategies and action plans adopted earlier than 2016 that are still under implementation in 2016.

Complete a separate table for each strategy or action plan in place in 2016 (maximum 3), if necessary. If the information is not available, please include “not available” in the table.

Name of the strategy or action plan (in English and in the original language)

Target group of the strategy or action plan (for example, majority population, professional groups (e.g. law enforcement officers; health care workers; teachers; judges; prosecutors)

The strategy or action plan relates directly to the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia (Yes/ No) The strategy or action plan relates directly to the Racial Equality Directive (Yes/ No)

Reference/Source (wherever available, provide a URL) Brief description of the goals and actions of the strategy or action plan; including which ethnic minority groups it focuses on (if available)

Design Date of adoption of the strategy or action plan Duration of the strategy or action plan in months Body that designed the strategy or action plan (for example, ministry, national human rights body) Social partners consulted in designing the strategy or action plan (name and type of social partner, in English and

(7)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in the original language)

Total budget allocated to the strategy or action plan (in Euro)

Source of the budget (for example, EU funds, state budget) The strategy or action plan includes measurable goals and indicators (Yes/ No)2

If yes, please briefly describe the goals and indicators Implementation Body responsible for implementing the strategy or action

plan (name in English and in the original language) The strategy or action plan incorporates structures for periodic monitoring of its progress. (Yes/ No)

Impact assessment The strategy or action plan foresees an impact assessment (Yes/ No)

Body responsible for the impact assessment (name in English and in the original language)

Social partners consulted in the impact assessment (name and type of social partner, in English and in the original language)

Indicators used in the impact assessment3_(Yes/No)

3. Policies, initiatives or safeguards to address racism, xenophobia and related intolerance

Briefly describe and fully reference policies, initiatives or safeguards adopted by public authorities or public institutions in place in 2016 to address racism, xenophobia and related intolerance within their ranks, such as tackling racism and xenophobia within law enforcement agencies, the criminal justice system, at schools, etc.

Promising practice (annex 1): Please identify and briefly describe one promising practice

tackling racism and xenophobia, in particular against asylum seekers, refugees and migrants.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision addressing the

application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive, or relevant to addressing racism, xenophobia and related intolerance.

2 For examples on measurable goals and indicators please see for example OHCHR (2014) Developing national action plans against racial discrimination – practical guide at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/HR-PUB-13-03.pdf.

3 For examples on measurable goals and indicators please see for example OHCHR (2014) Developing national action plans against racial discrimination – practical guide at

(8)

www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/HR-PUB-13-Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Chapter 3. Roma integration

1. Fundamental rights violations of Roma and Roma integration policies

Please fill in the following table regarding any evidence concerning fundamental rights violations of Roma and the implementation of Roma integration policies in 2016.

Have there been any official or unofficial reports, complaints or allegations on human rights violations concerning Roma in the country (e.g. unlawful evictions, violent attacks, hate speech) in 2016? If yes, please specify:

 what rights were reportedly violated,  when and where did they occur and

 if possible, how many people were affected and in what way

Please provide information and data, as available, on the number of discrimination complaints to Equality Bodies by Roma or related to discrimination on grounds of Roma ethnic origin

Please provide information about the implementation of Roma integration policies in 2016 in regard to education, housing, employment, health, education and poverty or any other area that was a particular priority in the respective country.

Please provide information about issues affecting specifically Roma children, youth and women.

Please provide information on any official or unofficial reports or evaluations of the implementation of Roma integration strategies or measures for year 2016 (for example, done by civil society or international organizations).

Are there any consistent measures taken for empowering Roma (Roma youth and Roma women in particular) in the view of boosting their empowerment and political and social participation?

2. Existing research on issues related to the fundamental rights of Roma

Has there been any major research or data collection (e.g. quantitative surveys) endeavour addressing the situation of Roma in 2016?

If yes, please provide details – what was the research, who conducted it, what kind of data it yields, are they available and where.

(9)

Promising practice (annex 1): Please identify and briefly describe one promising practice in

relation to projects or other initiatives addressing the education of Roma children and youth.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision addressing Roma

(10)

Chapter 4. Asylum, visas, migration borders and

integration

1. Type of alternatives to detention

Please review and update Table 1.5 in 2012 FRA Annual Report, p. 53 to reflect the situation on 31 December 2016, regarding the type of alternatives to detention provided for by law in your country.

Please also, complete the following table with sources and statistical data.

Alternatives to detention

INSERT: Country Name 1. Legislative changes

1.1 If there have been any legislative changes since 2012 please update Table 1.5 in 2012 FRA Annual Report, p. 53. If not, please confirm.

1.2. Please verify and update if necessary the legal sources listed under Table 1.5 in 2012 FRA Annual Report, p. 53.

2. Detention statistics

2.1 Please provide the total number of persons in immigration detention on 1 September 2016, and the breakdown by men, women, children (note not available - n. a - , if breakdown does not exist and provide total in this column) and by type of detention: asylum detention, Dublin or return.

2.1.1 Men 2.1.2 Women 2.1.3 Children

2.1.4 Unaccompanied children

2.2 Do the statistics include or exclude:

a) asylum seekers who have not yet received a final decision on their claim?

(if available, indicate how many asylum seeking children were detained, excluding those held on the basis of the Dublin Regulation)

(11)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights b) people detained in view of a Dublin transfer

(if available, indicate how many children were detained on the basis of the Dublin Regulation)

3. Statistics on alternatives to detention

3.1 Please provide the total number of people against whom alternatives to detention were executed on 1 September 2016 and the breakdown by men, women, children (note not

available - n.a, if breakdown does not exist); if statistics exist separately for each type of

alternative please add a separate annex) and by type of detention: asylum detention, Dublin or return.

3.1.1 Men 3.1.2 Women 3.1.3 Children

3.1.4 Unaccompanied children

2.2 Do the statistics include or exclude:

asylum seekers who have not yet received a final decision on their claim?

(if available, indicate how many were asylum seeking children, excluding “Dublin cases”) people detained in view of a Dublin transfer

(if available, indicate how many of them were “Dublin cases”)

4. Reports on alternatives to detention

4.1. Has any report been published in your Member State on alternatives to detention since 2012?

Yes/No

4.2. If yes, summarise in one sentence the main issue covered and provide a link to the electronic version of the report.

5. Any other comments

5.1. Please include here any other comments on alternatives to detention you may have.

2. Integration measures for primary and secondary education

Please provide information on specific measures that educational authorities have implemented in 2016 to integrate newcomer third country national pupils, and actively involve and support their parents and families in the school life?

(12)

Is there any evidence of specific measures to avoid the concentration of recently arrived children of refugees and/or migrants in schools or classes separate from the general school population and/or the native pupils? In this context, please specify the duration (in weeks -range min-max, for example 15-22) of any introductory and language courses aiming at integrating these pupils in regular classes.

3. Integration measures for tertiary, technical education and vocational training

Please provide information on any legislative or policy initiatives adopted or in place in 2016 responding to the education needs of recently arrived third country national children of refugees (asylum seekers, recognised refugees or beneficiaries of international protection) and/or migrants (under any residence status), as well as third country national migrant and refugee youth (15-25). This should include (a) any new legislation concerning the right of migrant and/or refugee children to attend school (b) training, as well as any measures, including financial support for teachers who work with these students.

relation to measures or other initiatives that addressed education of migrant and/or refugee children.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision with an impact on

integration of third country nationals.

1.1.1

(13)

Chapter 5. Information society, data protection

1. Surveillance by intelligence services

Please highlight the key developments (Legislation, policy, case law, reactions by civil society) in the area of surveillance by intelligence services (based on the scope of the published report ‘Surveillance by intelligence services: fundamental rights safeguards and remedies in the European Union - Mapping Member States’ legal frameworks’) in their Member State [Reference period: 1 July to 31 December 2016].

2. EU data protection reform

Please provide information on the significant policy, legal, judicial and other developments concerning the EU data protection reform. In particular, describe and summarise any developments in your Member State regarding the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation, the Police Directive and the Passenger Name Record Directive. Please report on the relevant reforms and/or practical changes in the Data Protection Authority’s role (such as funding, staffing, etc.).

[Reference period 14 April to 31 December 2016] 3. Data retention

Following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the joint cases of

Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger and Others, describe and summarise any developments in

your Member State in the area of data retention. Please address any policy, legislative and case law developments as well as actions/positions taken by NGOs, the ICT sector, the media, bloggers, and others.

[Reference period 1 January to 31 December 2016]

Promising practice (annex 1): Please provide one example of a promising practice for any

area of the above regarding information society and data protection in 2016.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision relating to

(14)

Chapter 6. Rights of the child

1. Please provide information on developments in 2016 in national laws, policies, programmes, initiatives, and research or data collection exercises in relation to:

a) child poverty (for example information on implementation of the EU Commission’s Recommendation Investing in children: breaking the cycle of poverty, national strategies to address poverty generally or specifically child poverty, coverage of child poverty in National Reform Programmes (within the European Semester process) or a programme at local level addressing any aspect of child poverty).

b) child-friendly access to justice for children in conflict with the law, as per the Directive on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings. Here we are especially interested in understanding future challenges in implementing the rights included in the Directive, with a special focus on the right to information (art. 4) , assistance by a lawyer (article 6), and children deprived of liberty (art. 10 and 12) .

2. Protection of unaccompanied children

Please fill in the table below with information on guardianship systems and foster care in Member States in 2016.

Foster care and guardianship systems for unaccompanied children in MS during 2016 (please

use as a basic guidance the FRA Handbook on Guardianship and the FRA report on Guardianship-)

National legal or policy developments related to guardianship systems for unaccompanied children

e.g. new plan of action for unaccompanied children which also covers guardianship, changes in the actors – responsible authorities , tasks of the guardians

Changes in the practice due to the migration trends end of 2015 and 2016

e.g. the system of appointment is simplified to accelerate appointments, recruitment procedures

Challenges encountered e.g. training, recruitment, the number of children per guardian is too high, the appointment of guardians takes several months, children absconding before a guardian is appointed, etc.

Data on the overall number of unaccompanied children i.e. data on children that do not seek asylum.

Please provide disaggregated official statistics as of September 2016.

Also provide other non-official sources if available.

Data on unaccompanied children that go missing

Please provide disaggregated official statistics as of September 2016.

Also provide other non-official sources if available.

In case of institutional guardianship, report on the average time to appoint a

(15)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights guardian to an unaccompanied

child and if available the number of children per guardian.

Possibilities of placement of unaccompanied children in foster care families

Please elaborate briefly on entitlements, recruitment and training of foster parents

Number of unaccompanied

children placed in foster care. Please provide disaggregated official statistics as of _{September 2016.}

Also provide other non-official sources if available

Measures/good practices to address challenges

Measures to address delays in the appointment procedures (such as temporary guardianship

arrangements)/ Availability (Recruitment procedures of sufficient number of guardians) / Training of guardians/ access of guardians to interpretation services and legal advice, etc.

Promising practice (annex 1): Please identify and briefly describe one promising practice

preferably in the area of children accused or suspected in criminal proceedings.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision in the area of

(16)

Chapter 7. Access to justice including crime victims

1. EU criminal procedure roadmap

Please, provide information on legislative, policy or other type of /reforms/measures adopted at national level in 2016 in response to adopted instruments under the EU criminal procedure roadmap, by filling the table:

2. Victims’ Rights Directive

With regard to the victim support services in the context of the Victims’ Rights Directive (2012/29/EU), please provide information on any major developments that took place in 2016 by completing the table:

Areas of victim support Any organisational developments in 2016 relating to the provision of victim support to

child victims (e.g. new victim support

services, changes in organisational structure of

existing victim support services/organisations). Any developments in relation to the number of victims supported (e.g. has the

number increased, decreased or remained stable in 2016). Please provide figures, where available Any developments in relation to State funding (e.g. has State funding increased, decreased or

remained stable in 2016). Please provide figures,

where available. Additional comments Generic (all EU Instrume nt National legal instruments adopted or proposed National policy instruments adopted or proposed Other type of measures adopted or proposed / actions undertaken / etc. Additional comments Directive 2010/64/ EU on interpret ation and translatio n Directive 2012/13/ EU on the right to informati on Directive 2013/48/ EU on the right of access to a lawyer

(17)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights victims of crime) Victims of domestic violence Child victims

3. Violence against women

Briefly describe measures taken in your country in 2016 to address violence against women (such as the adoption of legislation, the adoption of national strategies, specific guidelines, allocating specific budgets, etc.). Please also include information about any surveys undertaken in the area of violence against women in the course of 2016.

relation to any practical measures to support victims (i.e. generic or in relation to women as victims of domestic violence or child victims)

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision related to the rights

guaranteed by the EU Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings, EU Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings and EU Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings.

(18)

Chapter 8. Developments in the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons

with Disabilities

1. Measures taken to implement the CRPD at Member State Level: Outline legal and policy reforms/initiatives introduced to implement the CRPD in your country. Include reforms that are proposed, currently underway, as well as reform processes completed in 2016.

2. Using track changes, update the table below on structures for the implementation and monitoring of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) as outlined in Article 33 of the CRPD in your country. Describe key developments/changes relating to these structures, with a particular focus on the independence of the monitoring framework (Article 33(2)) and the involvement of civil society.

Promising practice (annex 1): Please identify and briefly describe one promising practice example of projects or programmes implementing the CRPD

including related to coordination between different actors in implementation of the CRPD.

Case law (annex 2): Please provide the most relevant high court decision making reference to the CRPD or employing the CRPD in their reasoning.

Table: Structures set up for the implementation and monitoring of the CRPD

EU MS Ratifie d in Optio nal Proto col

Focal points within government for matters relating to the

implementation of the CRPD – Article 33 (1)

Coordination mechanism – Article 33 (1)

Framework to promote, protect and monitor implementation of the CRPD – Article 33 (2)

Key developments/changes

AT 2008 Yes Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection

(Bundesministerium für Arbeit, Soziales und Konsumentenschutz); 9 regional

authorities (Länder) designated their own sub-focal points

Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Consumer Protection

(Bundesministerium für Arbeit, Soziales und Konsumentenschutz) with

CRPD monitoring committee (Monitoringausschuss); Austrian Ombudsman Board

(19)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights the involvement of the

Federal Disability Advisory Board

(Bundesbehindertenbeirat)

BE 2009 Yes

Federal Public Service Social Security (Federale

Overheidsdienst/Service public federal sécurité sociale),

Directorate-General for Strategy and Research; Sub-focal points designed by the seven communities and regions

Interfederal Centre for Equal Opportunities (Interfederaal

Gelijkekansencentrum/Centre interfédéral pour l’égalité des chances)

BG 2012 No

Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, Policy for People with Disabilities, Equal Opportunities and Social Benefits Directorate, Integration of People with Disabilities Department (Министерство на труда и социалната политика, дирекция “Политика за хората с увреждания, равни възможности и социални помощи”, отдел “Интеграция на хората с увреждания”) Not established/designated CY 2011 Yes

Ministry of Labour, Welfare and Social Insurance, Department for Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities (Τμήμα Κοινωνικής Ενσωμάτωσης

Ατόμων με Αναπηρίες, Υπουργείου Εργασίας, Ευημερίας και Κοινωνικών Ασφαλίσεων)

Pancyprian Council for Persons with Disabilities

Office of the Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsperson); Commissioner for the Protection of Human Rights

(20)

CZ 2009 No Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs

(Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí)

Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs Ministerstvo

práce a sociálních věcí) in

cooperation with Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Ministerstvo

zahraničních věcí),

Government Board for People with Disabilities (Vládní výbor pro zdravotně

postižené občany) and

National Disability Council (Národní rada osob se

zdravotním postižením)

Not established/designated

DE 2009 Yes

Federal Ministry for Labour and Social Affairs (Bundesministerium für Arbeit

und Soziales); 16 federal states (Länder) designated their own

sub-focal points

Federal Government Commissioner for Matters Relating to Persons with Disabilities

German Institute for Human Rights (Deutsche Institut für

Menschenrechte)

DK* 2009 Yes

Ministry of Children, Gender Equality, Integration and Social Affairs

(Ministeriet for Børn, Ligestilling,

Integration og Sociale Forhold)

Interministerial Committee of Civil Servants on Disability Matters

Danish Institute for Human Rights (Institut for

Menneskerettigheder); Danish

Disability Council (Det Centrale

Handicapråd); Danish

Parliamentary Ombudsperson

(Folketingets Ombudsmand)

EE 2012 Yes Ministry of Social Affairs

(Sotsiaalministeerium)

Cooperation Assembly between ministries

(Puuetega inimeste

Committee of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities under the Estonian Chamber of

(21)

koostöökogu), Estonian

Chamber of Disabled People (Eesti Puuetega Inimeste

Koda) and four DPOs

Disabled People (Eesti Puuetega

Inimeste Koda)

EL 2012 Yes

Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Social Solidarity, Directorate of International Relations (Υπουργείο Εργασίας, Κοινωνικής Ασφάλισης και Κοινωνικής Αλληλεγγύης, Διεύθυνση Διεθνών Σχέσεων) Not established/designated ES 2007 Yes

Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality (Ministerio de Sanidad,

Servicios Sociales e Igualdad); Ministry

of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation

(Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y Cooperación)

National Disabilities Council

(Consejo Nacional de la Discapacidad)

Spanish Committee of

Representatives of People with Disabilities (Comité Español de

Representantes de Personas con Discapacidad)

FI 2016 Yes

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

(Ulkoasiainministeriö); Ministry of

Social Affairs and Health (Sosiaali- ja

Terveysministeriö)

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (Sosiaali- ja

Terveysministeriö)

Human Rights Centre

(Ihmisoikeuskeskus); Human

Rights Delegation

(Ihmisoikeusvaltuuskunta);

Parliamentary Ombudsperson

(Eduskunnan oikeusasiamies)

FR 2010 Yes Ministry of Social Affairs and Health

(Ministère des Affaires sociales et de la santé); Interministerial Committee for

Disability (Comité interministériel du

Interministerial Committee for Disability (Comité

interministériel du

handicap), which consists of

Public Defender of Rights (Le

Défenseur des Droits); National

Advisory Council for Human Rights (Commission Nationale

(22)

ministries concerned

l’Homme); National Advisory

Council for People with a Disability (Conseil national

consultatif des personnes handicapées)

HR 2007 Yes Ministry of Social Policy and Youth (Ministarstvo socijalne politike

i mladih)

Ombudsperson for Persons with Disabilities (Pravobranitelj za

osobe s invaliditetom);

Commission of the Government of the Republic of Croatia for People with Disabilities

(Povjerenstvo Vlade Republike Hrvatske za osobe

s invaliditetom)

HU 2007 Yes

Ministry of Human Capacities (Emberi

Erőforrások Minisztériuma),

Department for Disability Affairs

(Fogyatékosságügyi Főosztály)

National Disability Council (Országos Fogyatékosságügyi Tanács), Interministerial Committee on Disabilty (Fogyatékosságügyi

Tárcaközi Bizottság)

IE* *

Department of Justice and Equality,

Equality Division Not established/designated

Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission

IT 2009 Yes Ministry of Labour and Social Policies (Ministero del Lavoro e delle

Politiche Sociali)

National Observatory on the Situation of Persons with Disabilities (Osservatorio

Nazionale sulla condizione delle persone con disabilità)

(23)

ministerija)

(Neįgaliųjų reikalų taryba) at the

Ministry of Social Security and Labour (Socialinės apsaugos ir

darbo ministerija); Office of the

Equal Opportunities

Ombudsperson (Lygių galimybių

kontrolieriaus tarnyba)

LU 2011 Yes Ministry of Family, Integration and for the Greater Region (Ministère de

la Famille, de l’Intégration et à la Grande Région)

Luxembourg Human Rights Consultative Body (Commission

consultative des Droits de l’Homme du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg); Centre for Equal

Treatment (Centre pour l’égalité

de traitement); Ombudsperson (Médiateur au service de citoyens)

LV 2010 Yes Ministry of Welfare (Labklājības ministrija); National Council of Disability Affairs (Invalīdu lietu nacionālā padome)

Ombudsperson of the Republic of Latvia (Latvijas Republikas

Tiesībsargs)

MT 2012 Yes

National Focal Point Office within the Ministry for the Family and Social Solidarity (Ministeru għallFamilja u

-Solidarjeta` Soċjali); Parliamentary

Secretariat for the rights of persons with a disability and active ageing

(Segretarju parlamentari għad-drittijiet ta’ persuni b’diżabilita’ u anzjanita’

Interministerial Board for the Coordination of the Implementation of the CRPD

National Commission for Persons with Disability (Kummissjoni

(24)

NL* *

Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (Ministerie van Volksgezondheid,

Welzijn en Sport)

Netherlands Institute for Human Rights (College voor de Rechten

van de Mens)

PL 2012 No

Ministry of Labour and Social Policy

(Ministerstwo Pracy i Polityki Społecznej)

Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (Ministerstwo

Pracy i Polityki Społecznej)

and the Team for the implementation of the CRPD provisions (chaired by the Government Plenipotentiary for Persons with Disabilities

(Pełnomocnik Rządu do Spraw Osób

Niepełnosprawnych))

Human Rights Defender

(Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich)

PT 2009 Yes

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Ministério

dos Negócios Estrangeiros, Direção-Geral de Política Externa), Directorate

General of External Policy; Ministry of Solidarity, Employment and Social Security, Strategy and Planning Office

(Ministério da Solidariedade, Emprego e Segurança Social)

National Institute for Rehabilitation of the Ministry of Solidarity, Employment and Social Security (Instituto Nacional

para a Reabilitação, Ministério da Solidariedade, Emprego e Segurança Social)

National mechanism for monitoring and implementation of the CRPD (Mecanismo

nacional de monitorização da implementação da Convenção)

RO 2011 No Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Protection (Ministerul Muncii, Familiei

şi Protecţiei Sociale), Department for

the Protection of Persons with Disabilities (Direcţia Protecţia

National Authority for Persons with Disabilities (Autoritatea Naţională

pentru Persoanele cu

Romanian Institute for Human Rights (Institutul Român pentru

(25)

Persoanelor cu Dizabilităţi) Dizabilităţi)

SE 2008 Yes Ministry of Health and Social Affairs

(Socialdepartementet)

High-Level Interministerial Working Group led by the Division for Family and Social Services of the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs

(Socialdepartementet)

Not established/designated

SI 2008 Yes

Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, Disability, Veterans and Victims of War Directorate (Ministrstvo za delo,

družino, socialne zadeve in enake možnosti, Direktorat za invalide, vojne veteran in žrtve vojnega nasilja)

Council for Persons with Disabilities of the Republic of Slovenia (Svet za invalide

Republike Slovenije)

SK 2010 Yes

Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family (Ministerstvo práce,

sociálnych vecí a rodiny, Odbor integrácie osôb so zdravotným postihnutím), Department for the Integration of Persons with

Disabilities; Secondary focal points in other ministries

Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (Komisár pre osoby

so zdravotným postihnutím)

UK 2009 Yes Department of Work and Pensions, Office for Disability Issues

Equality and Human Rights Commission (England and Wales); Scottish Human Rights Commission; Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and Equality Commission for Northern Ireland

EU 2010 No European Commission For matters of coordination between the Council, the Member States and the European Commission, see provisions of

European Parliament; European Ombudsman; FRA; European Disability Forum

(26)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights the Code of Conduct between

the Council, the Member States and the Commission setting out internal arrangements for the implementation by and

representation of the EU relating to the CRPD (2010/C 340/08)

Notes: * The Danish Council and the Danish Parliamentary Ombudsperson were not designated, but the explanatory text to the Parliamentary Decision B15 of 17 December 2010 provides that they are to be part of the framework.

** Ireland and the Netherlands have not yet ratified the CRPD; however, as the Article 33 bodies have been identified in the draft ratification documents, they are included in this table

(27)

Guidelines for Information Request on EU

Charter of Fundamental Rights

Timeline

7 October 2016 Information request delivered to FRA 24 October 2016 FRA comments (request for revisions)

9 January 2017 Revised and updated Information request (incl. case-law published in October-November-December 2015) delivered to FRA

16 January 2017 FRA comments (if needed)

26 January 2017 Final Information request delivered to FRA (if needed)

Length of the Information Request: maximum 3 A4-pages(excluding annexes). Reporting period: 1 Jan 2016 – 31 Dec 2016

1. Context, scope and purpose of the Information Request

This deliverable forms the background material containing data and information for FRA’s Annual Report in the chapter on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights by the EU Member States in 2016 and for the Charterpedia database.

2. How data should be presented.

Please use the Information Request submission template and complete the Information request evaluation sheet.

(28)

before national Courts)

Much is known on how the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (the Charter) is used at the level of the European Union. The “national life” of the Charter is to the contrary less explored, let alone well known from a comparative perspective. At the same time there is potential for mutual learning with regard to the implementation of the Charter at national level. For the purpose of this chapter the Agency is looking for high quality information and analysis with regard to the use of the Charter in national legislation, parliamentary debates, national policy documents and before national courts. The information provided in this chapter will complement the European Commission’s Annual Report and feed into the Agency’s Charterpedia. Moreover, it provides evidence for Charter related events like the various conferences on the Charter currently organised by the Trio presidencies. Given this background, the Agency expects this analytical information and data to be checked and reviewed by the Senior experts of FRANET network in order to guarantee completeness and accuracy of the information submitted.

1. The Charter in national case law in 2016

Provide key information and analysis on at least three national decisions that refer to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in a prominent manner, namely in a way where the

Charter has an impact on the reasoning of the court (do thus not include decisions that merely report that parties have mentioned the Charter in their submissions). Select

decisions delivered by the highest courts (including Constitutional Courts, Supreme Courts or Supreme Administrative Courts) which are most relevant to the legal development and/or where the Charter most clearly had an impact on the outcome of the case. Where highest courts did not hand down such decisions in 2016, also decisions by lower courts can be reported (when selecting decisions by lower courts, preference should be given to those which are most relevant to the legal development and/or where the Charter most clearly had an impact on the outcome of the case). Put each case in a separate table (see below table “A”), answer the specific questions in a precise manner. Important: If available/searchable, please provide the total number of all 2016 national decisions mentioning the Charter of fundamental Rights.

2. The Charter in (preparing) national legislation and parliamentary debates in 2016

Please provide three examples, if available, with key information for each of the category below:

a) The mentioning of the Charter in assessing and/or justifying potential impacts of future legislative measures (for instance in explanatory memoranda of legislative proposals).

b) The mentioning of the Charter by national institutions having a role in checking the legal compatibility of bills that were tabled, including external independent advisory bodies (i.e. Councils of State, Data Protection Agencies, Equality Bodies, Human Rights Institutions). c) The mentioning of the Charter in legislation that was finally adopted by the legislator.

(29)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights d) The mentioning of the Charter in parliamentary debates.

The three examples under each of these four different contexts have to be provided by filling in the table “B”. It is important to provide not only the references to the examples, but also the respective context and an assessment of how relevant the reference to the Charter was for the outcome of the respective example. When selecting the examples (in many Member States the examples can be easily accessed via databases), the contractor should choose those, where the reference to the Charter appears most relevant (in terms of result) and/or prominent (in terms of detail). For the legislation finally adopted and parliamentary debates, please also provide a total number of all the cases identified in 2016.

3. Charter related national policies, trainings and academia in 2016

Please provide three examples for each category below:

a) national policies that specifically aim at implementing or promoting the Charter;

b) training events on the application of the Charter (e.g. trainings organised for professionals explaining how to implement the Charter, other training activities aiming at promotion of application of the Charter);

c) articles on the Charter in the most relevant national academic journals (also monographs can be mentioned; no unpublished work like PhD thesis etc).

The three examples for policies, training efforts and academic articles are to be provided by filling in table “C”.

TABLE A: Charter in national case law in 2016

Deciding body (in original language)

Deciding body (in English) Case number (also European Case Law Identifier (ECLI ) where applicable)

Parties

Decision date

Web link to the decision (if available)

Which were the Charter provisions referred to in the case?

Key facts of the case situating also the fundamental rights dimension (max. 250 words)

Note that this executive summary has the purpose to make us understand: 1. the facts of the case (so the “real life story”)

2. the legal background against which the case unfolded (what are the relevant legal norms that are applied)

The key legal question raised by the Court Final result of the case in terms of factual outcome and in terms of assessment of the legal question raised

(30)

choosing the predominant topic of the case)

☐ Administrative cooperation ☐ Agriculture and Fisheries ☐ Area of freedom, security and justice, specifically:

☐ Policies on border checks, asylum and immigration ☐Judicial cooperation in civil matters ☐Judicial cooperation in criminal matters ☐Police cooperation ☐ Citizenship of the Union ☐ Civil protection

☐ Competition

☐ Consumer protection ☐ Culture

☐ Data protection

☐ Economic and monetary policy

☐ Education, vocational training and youth ☐ Employment ☐ Energy ☐ Environment ☐ External relations ☐ Financial provisions ☐ Free movement of capital

☐ Freedom of establishment ☐ Freedom of movement for workers

☐ Freedom to provide services ☐ Industrial Policy

☐ Intellectual, industrial and commercial property

☐ Non-discrimination ☐ Public health ☐ Regional policy

☐ Research and technological development

☐ Rome Convention of 19 June 1980 ☐ Social policy ☐ Social security ☐ Taxation ☐ Telecommunications ☐ Tourism ☐ Transport

Give full text of all the paragraphs where the Court uses the Charter in original language

Give full English translation of all the paragraphs where the Court uses the Charter

Did the Court use the Charter in order to (tick one or more boxes AND provide explanation):

☐ give direct access to an

individual right If yes, explain how this was the case (max 100 words)

☐ check legality of national law _{If yes, explain how this was the case (max 100 words)} ☐ interpret national law _{If yes, explain how this was the case (max 100 words)} ☐ check legality of EU law _{If yes, explain how this was the case (max 100 words)} ☐ interpret EU law _{If yes, explain how this was the case (max 100 words)} Was the Charter held (even

if only implicitly) applicable by the court (tick one box only AND give explanation including quotes from the court)

☐ Yes, the case concerned an institution, body, office or agency of the EU (Art. 51 (1) of the Charter)

Explain (max 100 words). Do also explain in case you think that the Charter should not have been applied.

☐Yes, the Member State was “implementing Union law”, including relevant CJEU case law

Explain (max 100 words). Do also explain in case you think that the Charter should not have been applied.

(31)

Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Art. 51 (1) of the Charter)

☐Yes, for other reasons

(implicitly) given by the Court Explain (max 100 words). Do also explain in case you think_{that the Charter should not have been applied.}

Was the Charter already referred to by the parties (including third parties where applicable) or was it the Court that used the Charter ex officio? Tick one box only.

☐ Charter was already referred to by the parties. ☐ Charter reference was introduced by the Court. Was the Charter referred

to together with constitutional, European or international sources? Tick one or more boxes as appropriate.

☐ Rights and principles as contained in the national constitution

Give concrete rights/articles that were referred to.

☐ (Unwritten) general

principles of EU law Give names of principles that were referred to. ☐ The European Convention on

Human Rights Give concrete articles that were referred to. ☐ Other Council of Europe

conventions? Give names of the legal sources that were referred to. ☐ International law (UN

conventions, etc.)? Give names of the legal sources that were referred to. ☐ European Court of Justice

decisions? Give names of the legal sources that were referred to. The relevance of the

decision and the Charter: overall assessment

This section should provide an overall analytical assessment of the information given above. So instead of summarising what was already said, please provide your expert view on: a) the relevance of the Charter for the concrete case and

b) the contribution of the decision described to the overall role of the Charter in the national legal system.

TABLE B: legislation and parliamentary debates in 2016

Provide three examples, where the Charter was used or referred to in impact assessments of upcoming legislative proposals.4

Ideally provide examples where the use of the Charter was decisive for the outcome of the impact assessment.

1

Title of the legislative file for which an impact assessment was conducted:

Reference (including web-link):

Is the legislative file “implementing EU law”: Yes ☐ No☐

Explain how the Charter was used (arguments and impact of the impact assessment on the legislative proposal):

2

Is the legislative file “implementing EU law” : Yes ☐ No☐

3

Is the legislative file “implementing EU law” : Yes ☐ No☐

4 Check for comparison: European Commission, Compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights in Commission legislative proposals – Methodology for systematic and rigorous monitoring of compliance with the

(32)

If Available, please provide the total number of impact assessments mentioning the Fundamental Rights Charter conducted in 2016.

Provide three examples where the Charter was used/referred to in the legal scrutiny of legislative proposals.5_{Ideally provide examples} where the use of the Charter made a difference to the substance of the legislative proposal.

1

Title of the legislative proposal:

Reference (including web-link)):

Was the legislative proposal implementing EU law : Yes ☐ No☐

Explain how the Charter was used (arguments and impact of the scrutiny on the final legislative draft):

2

3

If Available, please provide the total number of legal scrutinies mentioning the Fundamental Rights Charter carried out in 2016.

Provide three most prominent examples where the Charter was explicitly referred to in national legislation as finally adopted.

1

Title :

Reference (web-link):

Part mentioning the Charter (full text of respective paragraph in original language):

Parts of the national legislation mentioning the law (plus English translation):

2

Title:

3

Title:

5 Check for comparison: European Commission, Compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights in Commission legislative proposals – Methodology for systematic and rigorous monitoring of compliance with the Charter of fundamental rights, COM(2005) 172 of 29.4.2009.final

(33)

Provide a total number of all national legislation adopted in 2016 mentioning the Charter.

Provide three examples of 2016 parliamentary debates (or questions to the government) when the Charter was mentioned.

1

Author :

Reference (including web-link): Summary:

If there is an interesting quote on the CFR please provide the quote and its translation:

2

Author :

3

Author :

Provide a total number of all 2016 parliamentary debates (or questions to the government) when the Charter was mentioned. Please explain the source of this information.

TABLE C: national Charter policies, training, academia in 2016

Where there any national policy measures aiming at better implementation or promotion of the Charter? If so, please provide three examples.

1

Title and reference (web-link): Responsible ministry: Organiser:

Target audience:

Nature:

☐ awareness raising campaigns

☐ conditionality provisions in funding schemes ☐ fundamental rights documents

☐ other, please specify :

2

Title and reference (web-link): Responsible ministry: Organiser:

Target audience:

Nature:

(34)

3

Responsible ministry: Organiser: Target audience: Nature:

☐ other, please specify : If Available, please provide the total

number of policies mentioning the Fundamental Rights Charter in 2016.

Provide three examples of training schemes or training events where the Charter played a prominent role.

1

Title and reference (web-link):

Organiser: Target audience: Description:

2

3

Provide title and exact reference of three academic articles dealing specifically with the Charter and published in the leading national academic journals. Also, monographs can be listed but not unpublished PhD thesis.

1. Provide title (plus English translation) and exact reference.

2. Provide title (plus English translation) and exact reference.

FRANET Short Thematic Report Contribution to FRA Fundamental Rights Report 2017 & Information Request on EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in Spain

FRANET GUIDELINES

Short Thematic Report Contribution to FRA Fundamental Rights 2017

Contents

Guidelines for Short Thematic Report Contribution to the

FRA Fundamental Rights 2017

Timeline

1. Context, scope and purpose of the Short Thematic Report

2. How should the data be presented

3. Sources

4. Central requirements to be taken into account when drafting the report:

5.

Chapter 1. Equality and non-discrimination

Chapter 2. Racism, xenophobia and related intolerance

Chapter 3. Roma integration

Chapter 4. Asylum, visas, migration borders and

integration

Alternatives to detention

1.1.1

Chapter 5. Information society, data protection

Chapter 6. Rights of the child

Chapter 7. Access to justice including crime victims

Chapter 8. Developments in the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons

with Disabilities

Guidelines for Information Request on EU

Charter of Fundamental Rights

Timeline

1. Context, scope and purpose of the Information Request

2. How data should be presented.

before national Courts)

TABLE A: Charter in national case law in 2016

TABLE B: legislation and parliamentary debates in 2016

1

3

1

2

3

1

2

3

1

2

3

TABLE C: national Charter policies, training, academia in 2016

1

2

3

1

2

3