# CE2004088EN.01005201.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/52

---

(2004/C 88 E/0055)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1949/03

by Christa Randzio-Plath (PSE) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject:   TEKEL alcohol monopoly

Subject:

Imports of beer and spirits into Turkey currently face considerable difficulties since, despite the EC-Turkey Association Council of 22 December 1995 on implementation of the final phase of the customs union, Turkey has still not abolished the TEKEL alcohol monopoly. It is true that the alcohol laws were modified one year ago but, firstly, the implementing regulation for the import sector has to my knowledge not yet been adopted and, secondly, it would not anyway be sufficient since, according to existing plans, imports independent of TEKEL are to be allowed only upwards of a specific minimum volume.

| 1. | What is the current state of the EU's negotiations with Turkey on proper implementation of the customs agreement in respect of the import of alcoholic drinks and, in particular, what is the position of the Turkish Government regarding the Commission's call in the autumn of 2001 for it to ensure prompt implementation of the obligations arising out of the customs union agreement for the trade in alcoholic drinks? |
| --- | --- |

1.

What is the current state of the EU's negotiations with Turkey on proper implementation of the customs agreement in respect of the import of alcoholic drinks and, in particular, what is the position of the Turkish Government regarding the Commission's call in the autumn of 2001 for it to ensure prompt implementation of the obligations arising out of the customs union agreement for the trade in alcoholic drinks?

| 2. | Does the existing draft of the implementing regulation for the import sector constitute, in the view of the Commission, adequate implementation of the legislation on liberalisation of the market in alcohol and alcoholic drinks when measured against the objective of opening up the Turkish market to alcoholic drinks? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the existing draft of the implementing regulation for the import sector constitute, in the view of the Commission, adequate implementation of the legislation on liberalisation of the market in alcohol and alcoholic drinks when measured against the objective of opening up the Turkish market to alcoholic drinks?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2003)

(25 July 2003)

The Commission confirms the Honourable Member's assertion that the TEKEL monopoly has not been abolished by Turkey. However, under Decision 1/95 of the Community-Turkey Association Council (1), Turkey is only obliged to make changes to the monopoly so as to ensure that no discrimination exists regarding the conditions under which goods are procured and marketed between Member States and Turkey.

1

In 2001, Turkey amended the primary legislation (Law No 4250) by a new Alcohol Act (Law No 4619) which introduced thresholds for independent pricing and distribution. Subsequently, a significant development occurred with the setting up of the Tobacco and Alcoholic Beverages Markets Authority (TABA) by Law No 4733 in January 2002. By this law the regulatory powers of TEKEL were transferred to TABA, which is an independent authority. As a result TABA became responsible for secondary legislation to implement the 2001 Alcohol Act. According to information available to the Commission, a decree to this effect was published on 6 June 2003.

At the Community-Turkey Association Council in April 2003, the Commission and Turkey agreed to establish a joint action plan for the Customs Union in order to address a number of outstanding difficulties, including market access for alcoholic beverages. The action plan drawn up by the Commission services has been sent to Turkey in early July.

Although the Turkish Government has taken steps to comply with its Customs Union obligations with regard to alcoholic beverages, the Commission continues to have doubts over the compatibility of the primary legislation (Law No 4250 as amended by Law No 4619) with these commitments.

The situation will have to be reviewed once the Commission has had the opportunity to assess the impact of the newly adopted secondary legislation (i.e. the implementing decree) from the TABA on the import market.

---

(1)  Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 22 December 1995 on implementing the final phase of the Customs Union, OJ L 35, 13.2.1996.

1

---