# CE2004070EN.01012301.xml

| 20.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 70/123 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 70/123

---

(2004/C 70 E/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2630/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject:   The Eurostat affair

Subject:

Knowing that:

| 1. | Letter No 003411 of 18 March 2003 sent by the Director-General of OLAF to the Paris Public Prosecutor under the reference ‘CMS No 10120021510’ stated that:






  (a) | fraudulent activities detrimental to the Community budget and which could be qualified as criminal had been carried on; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Letter No 003411 of 18 March 2003 sent by the Director-General of OLAF to the Paris Public Prosecutor under the reference ‘CMS No 10120021510’ stated that:

(a)

fraudulent activities detrimental to the Community budget and which could be qualified as criminal had been carried on;

| (b) | the investigation has revealed that these activities were carried on by the managers of the company Planistat Europe SA, whose head office is in Paris, with the active complicity of European officials; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the investigation has revealed that these activities were carried on by the managers of the company Planistat Europe SA, whose head office is in Paris, with the active complicity of European officials;

| (c) | all the evidence [ ...] would suggest that OLAF is faced with a vast operation for plundering Community funds; and that |
| --- | --- |

(c)

all the evidence [ ...] would suggest that OLAF is faced with a vast operation for plundering Community funds; and that

| (d) | with reference to this case, Mr Yves Franchet, the director of Eurostat, and Mr Daniel Byk, head of unit at Eurostat, both of whom are officials of the European Commission based in Luxembourg and who are likely to have orchestrated this system in whole or in part, are French nationals. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

with reference to this case, Mr Yves Franchet, the director of Eurostat, and Mr Daniel Byk, head of unit at Eurostat, both of whom are officials of the European Commission based in Luxembourg and who are likely to have orchestrated this system in whole or in part, are French nationals.

| 2. | Press release IP/03/703 of 16 May 2003 stated that the Commission was ‘only in receipt of preliminary information relating to the file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor’. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Press release IP/03/703 of 16 May 2003 stated that the Commission was ‘only in receipt of preliminary information relating to the file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor’.

| 3. | Press release IP/03/723 of 23 May 2003 stated that the Commission had:






  (a) | decided to help (Franchet and Byk) defend their reputations and safeguard their rights of defence; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Press release IP/03/723 of 23 May 2003 stated that the Commission had:

(a)

decided to help (Franchet and Byk) defend their reputations and safeguard their rights of defence;

| (b) | and was ‘also keen to emphasise that everyone has the right to be presumed innocent and points out that the information in its possession at this stage does not enable any conclusions to be drawn as to the accountability of individual officials’. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

and was ‘also keen to emphasise that everyone has the right to be presumed innocent and points out that the information in its possession at this stage does not enable any conclusions to be drawn as to the accountability of individual officials’.

| 4. | Press release IP/03/979 of 9 July 2003 stated that ‘disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against three Commission officials’. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Press release IP/03/979 of 9 July 2003 stated that ‘disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against three Commission officials’.

In the light of the above, could the Commission indicate:

| — | whether the preliminary information relating to the file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor, which the Commission received from OLAF, included the assessments regarding Mssrs Franchet and Byk; |
| --- | --- |

—

whether the preliminary information relating to the file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor, which the Commission received from OLAF, included the assessments regarding Mssrs Franchet and Byk;

| — | what charges have been levelled at the three Commission officials against whom disciplinary proceedings have been launched, what measures have been taken in their regard and whether OLAF had informed the Paris Public Prosecutor of their names; |
| --- | --- |

—

what charges have been levelled at the three Commission officials against whom disciplinary proceedings have been launched, what measures have been taken in their regard and whether OLAF had informed the Paris Public Prosecutor of their names;

| — | how it actually intends to help Mssrs Franchet and Byk defend their reputations and to safeguard their rights of defence and whether, if the assessment of them sent by OLAF to the Paris Public Prosecutor proves to be hasty and erroneous, it intends to take action against OLAF, and if so what action? |
| --- | --- |

—

how it actually intends to help Mssrs Franchet and Byk defend their reputations and to safeguard their rights of defence and whether, if the assessment of them sent by OLAF to the Paris Public Prosecutor proves to be hasty and erroneous, it intends to take action against OLAF, and if so what action?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 2003)

(10 November 2003)

| 1. | The information provided by the Director-General of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to the French judicial authorities is an integral part of currently on-going national investigative proceedings, which are covered by rules of judicial secrecy. The Commission must therefore inform the Honourable Member that it cannot legally answer his first question. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The information provided by the Director-General of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to the French judicial authorities is an integral part of currently on-going national investigative proceedings, which are covered by rules of judicial secrecy. The Commission must therefore inform the Honourable Member that it cannot legally answer his first question.

| 2. | On 9 July the Commission opened disciplinary procedures against three Commission officials for alleged breaches of the Financial Regulation and of the Staff Regulations. Two of these procedures had to be immediately suspended for the legal reason, made clear to Parliament and to the public at the time, that pursuit of such procedures would be concurrent with an ongoing OLAF enquiry concerning the same officials. |
| --- | --- |

2.

On 9 July the Commission opened disciplinary procedures against three Commission officials for alleged breaches of the Financial Regulation and of the Staff Regulations. Two of these procedures had to be immediately suspended for the legal reason, made clear to Parliament and to the public at the time, that pursuit of such procedures would be concurrent with an ongoing OLAF enquiry concerning the same officials.

| 3. | The Commission considers that the rights of defence of the officials concerned are fully guaranteed in all proceedings. As the Honourable Member knows, OLAF has complete independence in the conduct of its investigations by virtue of Regulations 1073/99 (1) and 1074/99 (2). |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Commission considers that the rights of defence of the officials concerned are fully guaranteed in all proceedings. As the Honourable Member knows, OLAF has complete independence in the conduct of its investigations by virtue of Regulations 1073/99 (1) and 1074/99 (2).

1

2

---

1

Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 concerning investigations

conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.

(2)  Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999 of 25 May 1999 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.

2

---