CYIL Vol. 7, 2016

CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ THE SCOPE AND THE FUTURE OF EQUALITY OF TREATMENT… reform of the fundamental right of freedom of movement are going in two directions (Maslowski, 2016): 37 – The fight against abuse of rights, mainly against social tourism In 2013, the Ministers of Interior of Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and United Kingdom wrote a Common letter to the European Commission denouncing the fraudulent and abusive use of the freedom of movement by Union citizens. 38 They were requesting legal and financial measures allowing more effective sanctions, such as a ban on re-entry after an expulsion order. 39 This letter undermines the whole concept of EU citizenship and the fundamental right of freedom of movement, as it addresses Union citizens with concepts and words used normally for third-country nationals and it develops a stricter punitive approach (Pascouau, 2013). 40 – Stricter limitation of access to social assistance Member States are more favorable to the provisions of the citizenship directive than of the previous approach of the Court of Justice. Some of them will have a negative approach and directly interpret a request for social assistance as a way to expulsion, while others will have a more positive approach, requesting preliminary rulings on this question. It is clear that the question of access to social assistance to economically inactive Union citizens is questioning Member States that are not sure when they should or not provide these benefits. That is why Germany twice requested preliminary rulings on this question in the Dano and Alimanovic cases. Moreover, the results expected very soon of the referendum regarding Brexit will complicate the current situation much more. Indeed, during the last negotiations, Mr. Cameron required a limitation of social assistance for all Union citizens, included workers during the first four years of their residence. Such an approach is reserving equality of treatment only to permanent residents and is certainly a big step backward, especially for workers on the move. 41 37 MASLOWSKI S., Member States’ Sovereignty And Freedom of Movement of Union Citizens in KOVÁŘOVÁ, E., L. MELECKÝ AND M. STANÍČKOVÁ (eds.). Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on European Integration, 2016. Ostrava: VŠB – Technical University of Ostrava, 2016, pp. 594-604, ISBN 978-80-248-3911-0, p. 600. 38 Letter from Johanna Mikl-Leitner (Minister of the Interior, Austria), Hans peter Friedrich (Minister of the Interior, Germany), Fred Teeven (Minister for Immigration, Netherlands) and Theresa May (Home secretary, UK) to the EU Council Presidency and to Commissioners Viviane Reding, Cecilia Malmstrom and Laszlo Andor. Online: http://docs.dpaq.de/3604-130415_letter_to_presidency_final_1_2.pdf. 39 In 2014, many German towns complained that their social services were unable to cope with the massive influx of unemployed people from Eastern Europe. CDU general secretary of the time had even proposed not only to expel abusers of right but also to prevent them from returning to Germany. 40 PASCOUAU Y., Strong attack against the freedom of movement of EU citizens: turning back the clock, Commentary , EPC, 30. 4. 2013. 41 See SEELEIB-KAISER M., The new ‘settlement’ for the UK – EU Citizens, Social Rights and Brexit , 2016, Beucitizens.

149