With reference to the Commission's failure to consider the case registered as EMPL/E/3 MC/ek D(2005) 29782 and closed under reference EMPL/E/3 MC/ek D(2006) 13375 on the grounds that there was no ongoing and general administrative practice contrary to Community law, which runs counter to the conclusions of the Solvit report 16481/05 of 26 October 2005, based on the judgment in cases ECJ C-66/85 (Lawrie-Blum, para. 17) and C-109/04 (Kranemann, para. 15), there has been a series of complaints from EU citizens who have suffered discriminatory treatment at the hands of the municipal authorities of Melun, in the Ile de France region, department of Seine et Marne, as a result of the deliberate infringement of Article 39 of the EC Treaty and of the provisions of Annex XII of the Treaty of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia to the European Union, in particular Article 2(2) thereof.
Can the Commission provide a legal interpretation specifying how extensive breaches of Community law by Member States need to be before a particular case can be considered an ongoing and general practice and thus subject to official scrutiny by the Commission?
Will the Commission address the question of the probable infringement of the principle of the free movement of workers by the authorities of Melun, particularly in the light of the French Government's declared intention of partially opening up its labour market after 1 May 2006?