# CE2004088EN.01002701.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/27

---

(2004/C 88 E/0029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1382/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(15 April 2003)

Subject:   Consequences of the Copenhagen criteria for suppressing oppositions, restricting free expression of opinion, banning organisations and increasing the prison population

Subject:

| 1. | Does the Commission recall that the Presidency's conclusions for the June 1993 Copenhagen meeting of the European Council include (paragraph 7(iii)) the so-called ‘Copenhagen criteria’, which in particular lay down political criteria to the effect that new Member States of the European Union must have stable institutions that uphold democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the protection of minorities? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the Commission recall that the Presidency's conclusions for the June 1993 Copenhagen meeting of the European Council include (paragraph 7(iii)) the so-called ‘Copenhagen criteria’, which in particular lay down political criteria to the effect that new Member States of the European Union must have stable institutions that uphold democracy, the rule of law, human rights and the protection of minorities?

| 2. | Is it expected that Member States will also continue, after they have acceded, permanently to comply with those criteria? How does the Commission monitor for such compliance? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is it expected that Member States will also continue, after they have acceded, permanently to comply with those criteria? How does the Commission monitor for such compliance?

| 3. | Is it compatible with the Copenhagen criteria for a form of stability to be maintained in one or more Member States, or in parts thereof, by prosecuting the expression of political opinions, making it impossible for lawful opposition newspapers to be published, banning political and other organisations, treating new organisations formed to pursue the same objectives as previously banned organisations as ipso facto illegal, confiscating funds legitimately raised by organisations, making demonstrations against such measures impossible, or by sharply increasing the number of persons imprisoned on such grounds? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is it compatible with the Copenhagen criteria for a form of stability to be maintained in one or more Member States, or in parts thereof, by prosecuting the expression of political opinions, making it impossible for lawful opposition newspapers to be published, banning political and other organisations, treating new organisations formed to pursue the same objectives as previously banned organisations as ipso facto illegal, confiscating funds legitimately raised by organisations, making demonstrations against such measures impossible, or by sharply increasing the number of persons imprisoned on such grounds?

| 4. | Does the Commission consider it possible that an EU Member State might cease to comply with the Copenhagen criteria? What, in that event, would be the consequences for its continuing membership of the EU? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Does the Commission consider it possible that an EU Member State might cease to comply with the Copenhagen criteria? What, in that event, would be the consequences for its continuing membership of the EU?

| 5. | What action will the Commission take to prevent one or more EU Member States, old or new, from lapsing back into forms of government, censorship and criminal law that displayed features of the situation regrettably still obtaining at the present time in accession-applicant state Turkey, with its high numbers of persons wrongfully imprisoned, and a ban on movements, publications and the use, in public, of historically established regional languages? |
| --- | --- |

5.

What action will the Commission take to prevent one or more EU Member States, old or new, from lapsing back into forms of government, censorship and criminal law that displayed features of the situation regrettably still obtaining at the present time in accession-applicant state Turkey, with its high numbers of persons wrongfully imprisoned, and a ban on movements, publications and the use, in public, of historically established regional languages?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2003)

(11 June 2003)

| 1. | The Copenhagen criteria, as defined in the Presidency's conclusions of the June 1993 Copenhagen European Council, are the basis for the Commission's assessment of each Candidate Country's progress towards accession, first in the context of the 1997 Opinions, and subsequently in the framework of the Commission's Regular Reports on each country. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Copenhagen criteria, as defined in the Presidency's conclusions of the June 1993 Copenhagen European Council, are the basis for the Commission's assessment of each Candidate Country's progress towards accession, first in the context of the 1997 Opinions, and subsequently in the framework of the Commission's Regular Reports on each country.

| 2. | Through the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam in May 1999, the political criterion defined at Copenhagen has become enshrined as a constitutional principle in the Treaty on European Union. Article 6(1) of the consolidated Treaty on European Union stipulates that The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.' It is part of the obligations of Member States to respect these principles.
  Respect of these principles can be assured by the political procedure to this effect laid down within Article 7. It could be set up at the initiative of the Commission, European Parliament or Member States and includes prevention mechanisms and sanctions facing the Member State responsible. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Through the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam in May 1999, the political criterion defined at Copenhagen has become enshrined as a constitutional principle in the Treaty on European Union. Article 6(1) of the consolidated Treaty on European Union stipulates that The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.' It is part of the obligations of Member States to respect these principles.

Respect of these principles can be assured by the political procedure to this effect laid down within Article 7. It could be set up at the initiative of the Commission, European Parliament or Member States and includes prevention mechanisms and sanctions facing the Member State responsible.

| 3. | The freedom of thought, of expression and information, and of assembly and association, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (referred to in Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union) and applied through the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, and as recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, are fundamental rights. Respect for these fundamental rights constitutes an integral part of the Copenhagen political criteria. More generally, fundamental rights are also, according to the jurisprudence of the European court of Justice, part of the legal order of the EC. If a Member State does not respect them when executing rights and duties under the Treaty the Commission could open an infringement procedure against the Member State in accordance with Article 226 EC. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The freedom of thought, of expression and information, and of assembly and association, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (referred to in Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union) and applied through the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, and as recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, are fundamental rights. Respect for these fundamental rights constitutes an integral part of the Copenhagen political criteria. More generally, fundamental rights are also, according to the jurisprudence of the European court of Justice, part of the legal order of the EC. If a Member State does not respect them when executing rights and duties under the Treaty the Commission could open an infringement procedure against the Member State in accordance with Article 226 EC.

| 4. | If a Member State were to stop respecting the principles stated in Article 6, paragraph 1, the Commission would assume its role as laid out in point 2.
  In accordance with Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union, it is up to the Council to decide upon the measures to be laid down for the Member State incriminated. Suspension of voting rights of the governmental representative of that Member State in the midst of the Council could be one of these consequences. These measures cannot lead to this Member State's exclusion as such a perspective does not exist within the Union's institutional system. |
| --- | --- |

4.

If a Member State were to stop respecting the principles stated in Article 6, paragraph 1, the Commission would assume its role as laid out in point 2.

In accordance with Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union, it is up to the Council to decide upon the measures to be laid down for the Member State incriminated. Suspension of voting rights of the governmental representative of that Member State in the midst of the Council could be one of these consequences. These measures cannot lead to this Member State's exclusion as such a perspective does not exist within the Union's institutional system.

| 5. | The reply to this last question ensues from the response given to the Honourable Member under questions 2 and 4. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The reply to this last question ensues from the response given to the Honourable Member under questions 2 and 4.

---