Dear Mr X,

On 20 August 2019, you lodged a complaint with the European Ombudsman against the European Commission concerning its alleged failure to deal properly with the infringement complaint you submitted against the United Kingdom (UK) about the free movement of persons.

Your infringement complaint concerned the alleged breach of the EU Free Movement Directive 2004/38/EC^[1] by UK border guards when you entered the UK in April 2018. You claimed that UK border guards asked you were you came from, although there is no obligation for EU citizens to answer such a question.

In your complaint to the Ombudsman, you argue that the Commission did not handle properly your infringement complaint. In particular, you contend that the Commission’s decision to close your infringement complaint, because it was not possible for the Commission to prove that the UK authorities had actually infringed EU law in your particular case, was wrong.

After a careful analysis of all the information you provided with your complaint, we have decided to close the inquiry with the following conclusion:

The evidence and information provided in the complaint lead to the conclusion that there was no maladministration by the European Commission.

We note, first, that the Commission has wide discretion in dealing with complaints alleging a violation of EU law (“infringement complaints”). The European Ombudsman can, as a matter of good administration, seek to ensure that the Commission explains properly how and why it has exercised its discretion. The Commission should make available complete and clear information on the position it takes regarding an infringement complaint, give complainants the opportunity to present their views on its position, and carefully consider those views. Our inquiries seek to ensure that this is the case.

I note that the Commission has sufficiently explained to you why it will not pursue an infringement case against the UK. As the Commission stated, you were not prevented from entering the UK despite not having replied to the question of the border guard. This indicates that answering the question at issue was not considered to be a precondition for exercising your right to move freely within the EU. Moreover, the Commission informed you that the UK border guards appeared to have asked the question in order to observe the behaviour of travellers, and thereby identify imposters, and not to learn where the travellers actually came from.

We thus note that the Commission has fully informed you why it intended to close your infringement complaint and gave you the opportunity to comment on its position and its intention to close the case.

While you may be disappointed with the outcome of the case, we hope that you will find these explanations helpful^[2]. You are welcome to turn to the Ombudsman again should you encounter problems with an EU institution, body, office or agency.

Yours sincerely,

Marta Hirsch‐Ziembińska
Head of Inquiries and ICT ‐ Unit 1

Strasbourg, 23/09/2019

 

[1] Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32004L0038&from=FR

[2] Full information on the procedure and rights pertaining to complaints can be found at https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/document/70707 .