Decision setting up a temporary committee of inquiry

(96/C 7/01)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 138c thereof,

- having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Article 20b thereof,

- having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 107b thereof,

- having regard to the Decision of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 19 April 1995 on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry (1),

- having regard to Rule 136 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the request, attached to this decision, by more than one quarter of its Members for a temporary committee of inquiry to be set up to consider allegations of offences committed or of maladministration under the Community transit system,

- having regard to the proposal of the Conference of Presidents of 7 December 1995 concerning this request,

1. decides to set up a temporary committee of inquiry to consider allegations of offences committed or of maladministration in the Community transit system;

2. decides that the temporary committee of inquiry will submit a report to Parliament within 12 months of the publication of this Decision in the Official Journal of the European Communities;

3. decides that the temporary committee of inquiry will consist of 17 members.

(1) OJ No L 113, 19. 5. 1995, p. 2.

ANNEX

REQUEST FOR THE SETTING UP OF A TEMPORARY COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED CONTRAVENTIONS OR MALADMINISTRATION UNDER THE COMMUNITY TRANSIT SYSTEM (drafted pursuant to the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 7 December 1995)

Pursuant to Article 138c of the EC Treaty, the undersigned Members request the setting up of a committee of inquiry with a view to investigating alleged contraventions or maladministration in the application of Community law relating to the current Community transit system.

1. SUBJECT OF THE INQUIRY

1.1. The Community transit system

As set out in Chapter 1, Section 5, of the Commission's annual report for 1994 'Protecting the Community's financial interests - the fight against fraud` (1), the Community transit procedure allows goods to be moved under customs supervision between two points in the Community territory, while remaining exempt from taxes and duties and ineligible for any other measures resulting from Community policies.

The cornerstone of the procedure is the designation of a natural or legal person as principal whose main responsibilities are to lodge a guarantee to cover the collection of duties due in the event of irregularities and to present the goods in good condition at the customs office of destination within the time limit laid down. If the transit operation is considered to have been properly discharged, the principal is released from his obligations.

However in the event of irregularities, the perpetrator of the infringement, if he or she can be identified, is held liable for any duties and taxes which are payable. Failing this, payment is demanded from the principal; finally, if the latter is unable to fulfil this obligation, the guarantee covering the transit operation will be seized.

1.2. Current problems

In this document the Commission takes the view that the transit scheme has become a prime target for organized criminal networks seeking to develop fraudulent transactions. In this connection, the movement of highly-taxed goods such as cigarettes or other products covered by the common agricultural policy undoubtedly presents a high risk. The Council came to the same conclusion in its resolution of 23 November 1995 on the computerization of customs transit systems (2).

According to the Commission the most common types of fraud are:

- failure to present goods at the customs office of destination and releasing them onto the Community market without payment of the duties and taxes which are due;

- falsification of customs documents certifying the presentation of goods at the office of destination by using stolen or counterfeit stamps.

In these cases, the goods are illegally introduced and released onto the Community market without having been subject to the payment of the duties and taxes which are due.

1.3. Purpose of the temporary committee of inquiry

Deeply concerned by this phenomenon, on 29 March 1995 the Commission issued a communication 'Fraud in the transit procedure - solutions foreseen and perspectives for the future` (3). The Court of Auditors, too, also considered this problem and set out its analysis of the situation and its findings in its annual report concerning the financial year 1994. Unfortunately, these two documents generate more questions than they answer, with particular regard to the nature and scope in this area of maladministration in the application of Community law.

The purpose of this temporary committee of inquiry, therefore, is to establish the truth of these allegations and the implications for the administrations concerned so as to be able to draw up, where appropriate, the recommendations provided for in Article 4 (3) of the Decision of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of 19 April 1995 on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of the European Parliament's right of inquiry (4) and Rule 136 (10) of Parliament's Rules of Procedure (5).

2. DETAILED EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

In the documents referred to above, having noted that national administrations are responsible for the quality of administrative controls and management of the system, the Commission (point 4.2) and the Court of Auditors (point 1.48) also note that the quality of these controls has fallen progressively over the last few years.

Basically, the shortcomings in administrative control are apparently the cause of the serious and increasing phenomenon of fraud against the Community.

The causes of the very significant reduction in the quality of the administrative control in question may be set out in the following three categories of allegations:

2.1. Delays/tolerance of failure to respect time limits

- economic operators must present goods and documents to the customs office of destination within the time limits laid down (e.g. 20 days in the case of air transport and 45 days in the case of sea transport). However, in practice, these time limits do not appear to be respected, nor do penalties appear to be imposed where the time limits are not respected,

- investigations into outstanding operations are not initiated at an early enough stage, with the result that fraud is frequently established only at a very late stage,

- the late presentation to the customs office of departure of the copy to be returned results in an accumulation of uncleared documents. In some cases delays in transferring documentation between customs offices seem so great that it would be impossible to respect the time limits laid down by Community rules without a major effort to clear the backlog, bearing in mind the accumulated delays.

2.2. Poor administration of the system

- investigations are not carried out with the urgency and strictness required because the Member State administrations do not appear to give sufficient priority to transit controls,

- the existing rules and administrative provisions are not always applied by the Member States in a way which would guarantee sound management,

- monitoring of deliveries to and withdrawals from warehouses occasionally seems totally inadequate.

2.3. Notification of and procedures for recovery of the sums due

- as regards own resources, the amounts notified by the Member States on the basis of Council Regulation (EEC/Euratom) No 1552/89 of 29 May 1989 implementing the system of the Communities' own resources (1) and corresponding to the cases of fraud or irregularities are apparently very inadequate, approximately one third of the established amounts of fraud,

- the amounts recovered are apparently very small,

- penalties are laid down in current Community rules (the definition and implementation of which are governed by the national legislation of the Member States) but apparently they are virtually never applied,

- furthermore, only a small percentage of the cases notified on the basis of the abovementioned Regulation are apparently subject to legal proceedings.

By comparison with these three sets of allegations, already very specific and significant, the above reports of the Court of Auditors and of the Commission do not seem to specify why these shortcomings and cases of maladministration, or even breaches of the relevant provisions of Community law, occur and increase over the years.

3. TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE TEMPORARY COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY

This temporary committee of inquiry will therefore be set up with a view to clarifying the nature and causes of these cases of maladministration on the part of the competent national authorities and the fraud in the transit procedure and breaches of Community law which arise therefrom.

It will also recommend improvements with regard to the detection and prevention of fraud, the safeguarding of the Community's economic and financial interests and the recovery of sums due.

The committee will in particular investigate:

- the reasons for the crisis in the transit system,

- the shortcomings and loopholes in the procedures,

- the measures taken to improve the procedures,

- the additional measures to be taken forthwith,

- the measures taken or to be taken to recover the sums lost and to penalize those responsible.

4. DURATION OF THE TEMPORARY COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY

The temporary committee of inquiry will submit a report within 12 months of the date of publication of the decision of the European Parliament setting it up.

(1) COM(95) 0098.

(2) OJ No C 327, 7. 12. 1995, p. 2.

(3) COM(95) 0108.

(4) OJ No C 113, 19. 5. 1995, p. 2.

(5) OJ No L 293, 7. 12. 1995, p. 1.

(1) OJ No L 155, 7. 6. 1989, p. 1.