Commission decides to refer certain member States to the Court of Justice for not completely implementing EU Asylum rules. There is evidence that some foreign citizens have been involved in sabotaging EU policy during summer job placements in a covert ancient protest against Europe and its failure to rescue European East coast ship wreck survivors from the 16th and 17th century. They have been arrested for criminal mischief and for embezzlement of EU funds intended for the protection of asylum seekers. What if they had no motive but just failed as foreign citizens working in Europe with foreign passports to apply the code as directed, frustrating the intention of the EU? Everyone of you has a note on your phones that says the EU will break up. This is criminal intent. Why? ClIck here for more.

 Commission decides to refer certain member States to the Court of Justice for not completely implementing EU Asylum rules.   There is evidence that some foreign citizens have been involved in sabotaging EU policy during summer job placements  in a covert ancient protest against Europe and its failure to rescue European East coast ship wreck survivors from the 16th and 17th century.  They have been arrested for criminal mischief and for embezzlement of EU funds intended for the protection of asylum seekers.  What if they had no motive but just failed as foreign citizens working in Europe with foreign passports to apply the code as directed, frustrating the intention of the EU?  Everyone of you has a note on your phones that says the EU will break up.  This is criminal intent.  Why? 

Case C-79/13 Saciri and others (Arbeidshof te Brussel, Belgium, reference for a 

preliminary ruling on Articles 13 and 14 of the Reception Conditions Directive, 27 February 2014)

Judgment // AG Opinion // Application

1. Article 13(5) of Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum 

standards for the reception of asylum seekers must be interpreted as meaning, where a 

Member State has opted to grant the material reception conditions in the form of financial 

allowances or vouchers, that those allowances must be provided from the time the application 

for asylum is made, in accordance with the provisions of Article 13(1) of that directive, and must meet the minimum standards set out in Article 13(2) thereof.  All material reception conditions under this regulation must be provided from the time of the application according to Article 13(1) and 13(2) accordingly.  That Member State must ensure that the total amount of the financial allowances covering the material reception conditions is sufficient to ensure a dignified standard of living and adequate for the health of applicants and capable of ensuring their subsistence, enabling them in particular to find housing(hotel, motel, hostel as they have no proof of income for standard rentals) having regard, if necessary, to the preservation of the interests of persons having specific needs, pursuant to Article 17 of that directive. The material reception conditions laid down in Article 14(1), (3), (5) and (8) of Directive 2003/9 do not apply to the Member States where they have opted to grant those conditions in the form of financial allowances only. Nevertheless, the amount of those allowances must be sufficient to enable minor children to be housed with their parents, so that the family unity of the asylum seekers may be maintained.

2. Directive 2003/9 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude, where the 

accommodation facilities specifically for asylum seekers are overloaded, the Member States 

from referring the asylum seekers to bodies within the general public assistance system, 

provided that that system ensures that the minimum standards laid down in that directive as 

regards the asylum seekers are met.

The failure to use all the available state resources to save the life of the individual who is on need of help as certified is also a Criminal offence once notified.  See....

OBSTRUCTING MEASURES OF ASSISTANCE AND OMISSION TO

HELP

Articles 223-5 to

223-7-1

ARTICLE 223-5

(Ordinance No. 2000-916 of 19 September 2000 Article 3 Official Journal of 22 September into force 1 January 2002)

 Wilfully obstructing the arrival of help intended save a person from an imminent peril or to combat a disaster which

endangers the safety of persons is punished by seven years' imprisonment and a fine of €100,000.

ARTICLE 223-6

(Ordinance No. 2000-916 of 19 September 2000 Article 3 Official Journal of 22 September into force 1 January 2002)

 Anyone who, being able to prevent by immediate action a felony or a misdemeanour against the bodily integrity of a

person, without risk to himself or to third parties, wilfully abstains from doing so, is punished by five years' imprisonment

and a fine of €75,000.

 The same penalties apply to anyone who wilfully fails to offer assistance to a person in danger which he could

himself provide without risk to himself or to third parties, or by initiating rescue operations.