We have already shared with you a short first analysis of the Directive proposal on the mutual recognition of  professional qualifications. In the following lines, you will find a short analysis of the main points of the Directive proposal relating to the recognition of qualifications of third-country nationals.

 

  • The European Commission’s proposal requires Member States to allow a third country citizen to practice a liberal profession within the EU if they possess the necessary qualifications from an institution of their country of origin or a third country, or an attestation of competence issued by a competent authority of their country of origin.
  • Any recognition of formal qualifications must be contingent on fulfilling the minimum conditions set in the Directive 2005/36/EC as it stands now and obviously as it will stand after being amended.
  • The European Commission proposes compensation measures if the skills of an individual are questionable due to differences in their training or if there are justified doubts about the quality of the education received in the third country. Then, the host Member State can require an adaptation period of not more than 3 years, a test of professional competence, an aptitude test, or a bridging course of up to a year. Regardless, we must be realistic and observe that in some third countries, unfortunately, certifications and diplomas are being bought, and that an adaptation period may not be enough to ensure the equivalence in our national standards and the security of our clients and patients.
  • The proposed Directive introduces recognition of foreign qualifications by a Trusted Review Bodyto be composed of members appointed by a Quality Assurance Agency. These members will be experts on the matter, quality assurance specialists and methodologists. The Trusted Review Body can invite up to three reviewers from Member states. However, this is not mandatory.
  • Once a third country institution is judged by the Trusted Review Body to fit within EU standards, the holders of certificates from it would have the right to an automatic recognition of their qualifications.
  • The Trusted Review Body will judge the compliance of a third country institution with EU standards based on the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area. Given the fact that many professions do not yet benefit from common standards within the EU, it is difficult to see how the Trusted Review Body would be able to fulfill its tasks.
  • The Commission has the right to publish a list of third countries where quality assurance systems provide guarantees regarding the standards of practice. This list will be considered as binding for any decisions regarding the recognition of qualifications, and thus any institution of a third country that is in the list will automatically qualify, and the criteria from article 13 a) and b) will be considered fulfilled. However, the Commission’s proposal does not clarify how third countries will be considered eligible for that list.
  • Member States must ensure that the assessment of skills is taken into account in the process of granting a long-stay visa or a residence permit. This means that the assessment must be completed within the visa or the residence permit procedure’s defined delay.
  • Recognition of qualifications must be done before any other types of control. That includes tests of knowledge of languages. This does not reflect the importance for liberal professionals to communicate clearly with their colleagues or with their clients and patients. Member States shall carry out controls that ensure that the applicant has the knowledge of at least one official language of the host Member State, or one administrative language of the host Member State, provided that it is also an official language of the Union. However, the language level necessary to be judged adequate to practice a liberal profession is not defined clearly.
  • The Commission’s text proposes to allow the Member States to require solely the types of documents and certificates listed at Annex VII of Directive 2005/36/EC. Host Member States, in cases of justified doubts, may require from the competent authorities of a Third country, confirmation of the fact that the applicant is not suspended or prohibited from the pursuit of their professional activities as a result of serious professional misconduct or conviction for criminal offenses relating to the pursuit of these activities.
  • Where the applicant duly documents that, despite reasonable efforts, they were unable to obtain the documents required to, the host Member State shall assess the feasibility of, and where appropriate, employ alternative methods to assess qualifications, skills or other evidentiary elements. The host Member State shall ensure that applicants are not unduly disadvantaged due to circumstances outside of his control, and shall base its decisions on available and reasonable evidence.
  • Where a host Member State requires its nationals to swear a solemn oath or make a sworn statement in order to gain access to a regulated profession, and where the wording of that oath or statement cannot be used by a third-country national, the host Member State shall ensure that the person concerned can use an appropriate equivalent wording
  • This Directive proposal does not consider the diversity of terms and concepts used around the world. The expertise of a professional is primordial and the risk of lacking knowledge about European terms used in their profession represents a major risk to the public and to clients and patients. In pharmacology, for instance, the same medicine can have different names. The patients rely primarily on the knowledge of their specialist on the names of medicines they know, rather than the molecule name.

 

It is obvious that the Commission’s text includes several points of concern. EurEta will discuss the text and draft a document to be shared with MEPs and national ministers in order to improve the proposal.