# CE2004065EN.01005701.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/57

---

(2004/C 65 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0920/03

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) and Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 March 2003)

Subject:   Release by the Netherlands authorities of Mullah Krekar

Subject:

Is the Commission aware that the Netherlands authorities have released Mullah Krekar, leader of the international Islamic organisation Ansar al-Islam?

Is the Commission aware that Mullah Krekar, who was arrested at Amsterdam airport after being expelled from Iran is currently in Norway where he has refugee status?

Is the Commission aware that the terrorist organisation headed by Mullah Krekar is said to have produced and tested chemical and biological weapons, including ricin, a lethal toxin for which there is currently no vaccine?

What action will the Commission take to counteract Mullah Krekar's activities and prevent him from ever entering the European Union, thereby ensuring that in future he is unable to move around within the EU as he did in the years leading up to his arrest?

What action will the Commission take to ensure that Norway keeps a watchful eye on the activities of Mullah Krekar's and his organisation, which seems to be recruiting many of the Al-Qa'ida members who escaped from Afghanistan?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 2003)

(28 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of Mr Krekar's case.

Following an amendment by the United Nations' Sanctions Committee on 24 February 2003, Commission Regulation (EC) No 350/2003 of 25 February 2003 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 (1), has included Ansar al-Islam in the list of ‘Legal persons, groups and entities’ to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources shall apply.

1

Article 96 of Schengen Convention (2) provides for the possibility to prevent third country nationals from entering the territory of the Member States by issuing an alert on them in the Schengen Information System (SIS). This type of alerts to be introduced by a Member State must in principle be enforced by all 13 Member States which have fully implemented the Schengen acquis, or by States that have been associated with it, as Norway and Iceland have. The decision to issue an alert based on Article 96 of the Schengen Convention may be based on the fact that the third country national poses a threat to public policy or public security.

2

In order to cope with potential contradictions that may arise from decisions made successively by different Member States, Article 25 of Schengen Convention provides for consultation procedures between Member States. These procedures are used when a Member State considers issuing, or has already issued a residence permit to a third country national on whom an Article 96 alert exists in the SIS. These consultation procedures are also used when it emerges that a Member State envisages to issue an Article 96 alert for the purposes of refusing entry on a third country national holding a valid residence permit issued by another Member State.

The outcome of the consultation foreseen by Article 25 of the Schengen Convention may be:

| — | either the withdrawal of alert from SIS with the possibility for individual Member State to keep that person on their national list of alert; |
| --- | --- |

—

either the withdrawal of alert from SIS with the possibility for individual Member State to keep that person on their national list of alert;

| — | or the withdrawal of the residence permit with the confirmation of the alert in the SIS. |
| --- | --- |

—

or the withdrawal of the residence permit with the confirmation of the alert in the SIS.

If Member States issued an alert on Mr Krekar based on Article 96 of the Schengen Convention, similar consultations could take place and open the two options mentioned above.

Finally, as regards possible action by the Commission to ensure that Norway keeps a watchful eye on the activities of Mr Krekar and his organisation, the Commission informs the Honourable Members that this matter falls entirely within the competencies of the Norwegian authorities. The Commission may neither issue alerts nor have knowledge of the alerts that have been issued; the SIS is run by the Member States and national alerts are under the responsibility of Member States' authorities. Nevertheless, in the hypothesis that no alert based on Article 96 has been issued on Mr Krekar, an alert for the purpose of ‘discreet surveillance and specific checks’ based on Article 99 of the Schengen Convention could be issued by other Member States.

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 350/2003 of 25 February 2003 amending for the 13th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001, OJ L 51, 26.2.2003.

1

(2)  Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985, signed on 19 June 1990, OJ L 239, 22.9.2000.

2

---