Opis: | Since the beginning of its existence the European integration has devoted special attention to the right of free movement of persons, from where the social rights of EU citizens stem. Free movement of people was at first largely confined to workers and self-employed persons and only these categories could rely on equal treatment with national citizens in the field of social rights. With the introduction of European citizenship the institute of equal treatment was extended to all European citizens. Through its case law the ECJ had importanltly extended the scope of the relatively few and vague provisions regarding access to social rights in host Member States, emphasizing the principle of non-discrimination and drawing the limits to national sovereignty in the sphere of social policy. Member States have thus lost their monopoly in setting the criteria for accessing national social rights, which may not be limited exclusively to its citizens nor taken advantage of exclusively on its territory. Despite the objections of some Member States that they have, against their will, lost control over their system of social welfare, ECJ's case law in this field remains rich in inconsitencies. The trend of granting a wide range of social rights to EU citizens, including the economically inactive ones, has recently, following the ever louder complaints of Member States about the emergence of "social tourism", changed. A more restrictive approach, with emphasis on the »integration model«, has been adopted by the ECJ, as evidenced in the case of Brey, Dano and Alimanovic.
The EU has no direct competence in the field of national housing policy, but since granting access to social housing falls under the definition of social assistance, the latter in turn falls under the jurisdiction of TFEU. When allocating social housing Member States are obliged to comply with the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, yet the national legislation of a number of Member States do not. As early as 1988 in the case Commission v Italy did the ECJ take a clear stance that the element of citizenship may not play a role in granting access to social housing in Member States. Even so, the legislation of the United Kingdom nowadays contains the "right to reside" test under which the British authorities consider whether an individual has the right to reside in its territory and consequently has the right to social assistance. The aforementioned test is currently subject to judicial review in the case Commission v United Kingdom. The Flemish decree on land and property states that only individuals who are sufficiently intertwined with a municipality are entitled to social housing on which the ECJ has already ruled in the case of Libert. A distinctly interventionist approach has been adopted in the judgement, restricting the Flemish legislator in its sovereignty in the field of national social policy. The Slovenian Housing Act too contains discriminative conditions which must be fulfilled for citizens of other EU states to be entitled to social housing. |
---|