Published: 15 October 2010 Updated: 18 October 2010
A leading Turkish lobbyist called yesterday (14 October) for the EU to lift visa requirements for his country’s nationals by using as a basis a court decision. But the European Commission made clear that the long-standing problem was not likely to be resolved by legal means.
Professor Haluk Kabaalioğlu, chairman of the Economic Development Foundation (İKV) and the dean of Yeditepe University’s Law Faculty, called on the EU institutions and in particular the European Commission to take legal action against member states that require visas for Turkish visitors.
Speaking at a public event in Brussels, Kabaalioğlu argued that Turkey’s 1963 Association Agreement with the EEC encompassed all four basic freedoms of the Treaty of Rome, including the movement of persons.
An additional protocol of 1970 provided a timetable, which in his words enacted those freedoms in 1986. That has not been achieved for various reasons, Kabaalioğlu said.
The so-called Soysal case, in the professor’s words, ruled against requiring visas for Turkish citizens, to whom such restrictions did not apply at the time of the entry into force of the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement, concluded between the EEC and Turkey on 23 November 1970.
On 19 February 2009, the European Court of Justice ruled ruled in favour of Mehmet Soysal and Ibrahim Savatl, who drove lorries for a Turkish company owned by a German company, and whose visa renewal applications had been rejected by a Berlin court.
The judgement says that the Additional Protocol of 1970 should be interpreted as meaning that Turkish nationals who provide services need no visa in Germany, since in 1970 such visas for them were not required.
Kabaalioğlu argued that by introducing visas for Turkey, the EU countries had violated his country’s Association Agreement. He went on to say that the court ruling on service providers in fact encompassed the whole population, as service recipients such as tourists in his words fell under the same category.
'Temporary measure'
After visas for Turkish nationals were introduced by Germany in 1980, Kabaalioğlu said he had refused an invitation to take part in a conference in Hamburg in 1981, writing to the German organiser that he could not come, because by applying for a visa, he did not want to subject himself to a legal act which was in violation of his county’s Association Agreement.
In an attempt to help, his German counterpart sent the letter to then German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who wrote to Kabaalioğlu that the measure was temporary. "Now it's already 30 years," Kabaalioğlu said bitterly.
A Commission representative present at the discussion said that Professor Kabaalioğlu had correctly presented the Soysal case, adding that the Court ruling had been “quite unexpected” for the EU institutions.
Following the case, the Commission had issued guidance to consular services and border guards as to the situations in which a Turkish service provider requires a visa or not.
On the question of recipients of services, the Commission has no position at the moment, the Commission official said.
"It's quite uncomfortable to say that one-and-a-half years after the Soysal case, but the thing is it's a very complicated legal issue […] The legal issue is so complicated that we cannot only solve it by legal means," the Commission representative said.
The EU executive official added that the Commission hoped the Court of Justice at some point would help resolve the issue. In the Commission interpretation, the Court of Justice had said that Soysal did not require a visa.
"Apart from that, that judgement is not exactly helpful," the Commission representative said.
Asked by EurActiv to clarify, Kabaalioğlu admitted and the Commission representative confirmed that the scope of the Soysal ruling was the nine members of the EEC in 1970, and not the 27 present EU members.
Asked by EurActiv if Turkey planned legal action against the EU, Kabaalioğlu admitted this was not possible. Turkey cannot refer the issue to the European Court of Justice, because it is not an EU member. In theory, the EU-Turkey Association Council could refer it to the International Court of Justice, but the decision in the Association Council needs unanimity, he bitterly admitted.
Kabaalioğlu was also asked if his country had signed readmission agreements with all its neighbours, as other candidate countries had done, before achieving a visa-free regime with the EU.
"We don’t want to say we don't want readmission," Kabaalioğlu said, adding that Turkey would have a problem admitting 'boat people' arriving in Italy who claimed have arrived from Turkey, just because they feared expulsion to Libya.
Speaking at a public event in Brussels, Kabaalioğlu argued that Turkey’s 1963 Association Agreement with the EEC encompassed all four basic freedoms of the Treaty of Rome, including the movement of persons.
An additional protocol of 1970 provided a timetable, which in his words enacted those freedoms in 1986. That has not been achieved for various reasons, Kabaalioğlu said.
The so-called Soysal case, in the professor’s words, ruled against requiring visas for Turkish citizens, to whom such restrictions did not apply at the time of the entry into force of the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement, concluded between the EEC and Turkey on 23 November 1970.
On 19 February 2009, the European Court of Justice ruled ruled in favour of Mehmet Soysal and Ibrahim Savatl, who drove lorries for a Turkish company owned by a German company, and whose visa renewal applications had been rejected by a Berlin court.
The judgement says that the Additional Protocol of 1970 should be interpreted as meaning that Turkish nationals who provide services need no visa in Germany, since in 1970 such visas for them were not required.
Kabaalioğlu argued that by introducing visas for Turkey, the EU countries had violated his country’s Association Agreement. He went on to say that the court ruling on service providers in fact encompassed the whole population, as service recipients such as tourists in his words fell under the same category.
'Temporary measure'
After visas for Turkish nationals were introduced by Germany in 1980, Kabaalioğlu said he had refused an invitation to take part in a conference in Hamburg in 1981, writing to the German organiser that he could not come, because by applying for a visa, he did not want to subject himself to a legal act which was in violation of his county’s Association Agreement.
In an attempt to help, his German counterpart sent the letter to then German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who wrote to Kabaalioğlu that the measure was temporary. "Now it's already 30 years," Kabaalioğlu said bitterly.
A Commission representative present at the discussion said that Professor Kabaalioğlu had correctly presented the Soysal case, adding that the Court ruling had been “quite unexpected” for the EU institutions.
Following the case, the Commission had issued guidance to consular services and border guards as to the situations in which a Turkish service provider requires a visa or not.
On the question of recipients of services, the Commission has no position at the moment, the Commission official said.
"It's quite uncomfortable to say that one-and-a-half years after the Soysal case, but the thing is it's a very complicated legal issue […] The legal issue is so complicated that we cannot only solve it by legal means," the Commission representative said.
The EU executive official added that the Commission hoped the Court of Justice at some point would help resolve the issue. In the Commission interpretation, the Court of Justice had said that Soysal did not require a visa.
"Apart from that, that judgement is not exactly helpful," the Commission representative said.
Asked by EurActiv to clarify, Kabaalioğlu admitted and the Commission representative confirmed that the scope of the Soysal ruling was the nine members of the EEC in 1970, and not the 27 present EU members.
Asked by EurActiv if Turkey planned legal action against the EU, Kabaalioğlu admitted this was not possible. Turkey cannot refer the issue to the European Court of Justice, because it is not an EU member. In theory, the EU-Turkey Association Council could refer it to the International Court of Justice, but the decision in the Association Council needs unanimity, he bitterly admitted.
Kabaalioğlu was also asked if his country had signed readmission agreements with all its neighbours, as other candidate countries had done, before achieving a visa-free regime with the EU.
"We don’t want to say we don't want readmission," Kabaalioğlu said, adding that Turkey would have a problem admitting 'boat people' arriving in Italy who claimed have arrived from Turkey, just because they feared expulsion to Libya.
Background
In the sixties, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France asked Turkey to provide a labour force for their booming employment markets. A flow of hundreds of thousands of Turkish 'guest workers' followed.
However, following the economic stagnation of 1967, Western countries stopped issuing work permits. Following the 1973 oil crisis, they declared that they had abolished immigration for employment purposes.
In 1980, Germany introduced a visa obligation for Turkish citizens, followed by the Benelux countries and France.
Since 1995, the Schengen countries have common 'positive' and 'negative' visa lists. Turkey is on the 'negative' visa list and its citizens require a visa to visit EU countries.
Unlike the Western Balkan countries, Turkey has not benefited from a 'visa facilitation' mechanism, leading to the elimination of the visa barrier.
In the sixties, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France asked Turkey to provide a labour force for their booming employment markets. A flow of hundreds of thousands of Turkish 'guest workers' followed.
However, following the economic stagnation of 1967, Western countries stopped issuing work permits. Following the 1973 oil crisis, they declared that they had abolished immigration for employment purposes.
In 1980, Germany introduced a visa obligation for Turkish citizens, followed by the Benelux countries and France.
Since 1995, the Schengen countries have common 'positive' and 'negative' visa lists. Turkey is on the 'negative' visa list and its citizens require a visa to visit EU countries.
Unlike the Western Balkan countries, Turkey has not benefited from a 'visa facilitation' mechanism, leading to the elimination of the visa barrier.
euractiv
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου