The fact that a Community official publicly expresses a different opinion from that of the institution for which he works does not in itself jeopardise the interests of the Communities
Mr Cwik, an economist by training, has worked at the European Commission since 1970. At the time when the action was brought, he was working in the department dealing with "information, publications and economic documentation" and was responsible for receiving visiting groups and giving lectures on the Euro and Economic and Monetary Union.
Having obtained permission from his superiors to give a lecture in Cordoba (Spain) at the Fifth International Congress on Economic Culture, Mr Cwik delivered his lecture on 30 October 1997.
The subject of the lecture was the need for economic fine-tuning at the local and regional level within the Monetary Union of the European Union. In 1998 Mr Cwik applied for authorisation to publish the text of his lecture. His immediate superior, having asked suitably qualified persons for their opinion as to whether publication was appropriate, informed Mr Cwik on 10 July 1998 of his refusal to authorise publication of the text. He considered that the point of view it put forward was not that of the Commission.
Under Article 17 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities, officials desiring to exercise their freedom of expression by publishing matters dealing with the work of the Communities must first obtain permission to do so. The Court of First Instance noted that permission may be refused only where publication would be liable to prejudice the interests of the Communities.
The Court observed that freedom of expression is one of the fundamental rights protected by the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and by the Treaty on European Union. That right is also enjoyed by Community officials.
The Court found that the Staff Regulations give expression to the permanent need to strike a fair balance between ensuring that a fundamental right may be exercised and protecting a legitimate objective of general interest.
It held that, in a democratic society founded on respect for fundamental rights, there can be no justification for restricting the right to freedom of expression in a case involving no more than an expression of a difference of opinion between the official and his employer, in so far as making that difference public would not in itself be liable to prejudice the Communities' interests.
The Court noted that, at the material time, the official concerned did not have any management responsibilities. The text dealt with a matter on which the Commission had already publicly made clear its opinion. There was therefore no possibility of the Commission's room for manoeuvre being reduced as a result of a risk of the public being confused as to which was the official's opinion (expressed in any event to an audience of specialists) and which was the Commission's opinion. The Commission's concern therefore appeared to the Court to be unfounded, particularly since it was the Commission that had authorised Mr Cwik to take part in a conference dealing with the same subject.
In those circumstances, the Court annulled the Commission's decision refusing Mr Cwik permission to publish the text of the lecture he had given.
Unofficial document for media use which does not bind the Court of First Instance. Available in : French and English.
For the full text of the judgment, consult our Internet page www.curia.eu.int at around 3 pm today.
For further information contact Jean-Michel Rachet, Tel. (00352) 4303.3315 Fax (00352) 4303.2034.