13. Stresses that the adverse socio-economic effects of excise duty on aviation fuel must be minimised;
calls therefore on the Council to prepare for renegotiation of the bilateral agreements governing the treat-ment of aviation fuel and to examine how transport, both within the Union and to and from third coun-tries, might be brought within the scope of such a tax regime; also calls on the Council to workenergeti-
cally to ensure that a compromise is reached on the treatment of aviation fuel at the ICAO’s 33rd
Assembly in 2001;
14. Calls on the Council Presidency and the Commission to keep Parliament fully informed about the
33rd ICAO Assembly in 2001; calls on the Presidency and the Commission to state before the Assembly
what the EU’s input will be, and, after it has finished, to report to Parliament on the workof the Assembly
and its results, particularly with regard to excise duty on aircraft fuel;
15. Urges the Commission to submit a communication on proposals for internal EU measures if no
satisfactory measures are taken by the ICAO at the 33rd Assembly next year;
16. Urges the Commission to press for a renegotiation of the 1944 Chicago Convention and the bilat-
eral Air Service Agreements (ASAs), which fix the exemption from taxes for fuel supplied on the territory
of the contracting parties;
17. Is of the opinion that other measures to reduce CO
2emissions from air transport should also be
urgently envisaged, such as emissions trading schemes, voluntary agreements by the air transport industry,research and development programmes for technological improvement of engines and fuel, differentiatedenvironmental levies, the drawing-up of environmental contracts and better management of air traffic, andthat these should include clear targets and monitoring procedures with penalties to safeguard fair competi-tion in the internal market;
18. Calls on the Commission to undertake a study analysing these alternative solutions;
19. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.
15.Precautionaryprinciple
A5-0352/2000
European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication on the precautionary princi-
ple(COM(2000)1/dashC5-0143/2000/dash2000/2086(COS))
The European Parliament
7dash having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 1 7dash C5-0143/2000),
7dash having regard to Article 174 of the EC Treaty, which refers to the precautionary principle,7dash having regard to the Council resolution of 13 April 1999 calling on the Commission to allow itself in
future to be guided by the precautionary principle to a greater extent(
1),
7dash having regard to the Commission Green Paper of 30 April 1997 on the general principles of food law
in the European Union (COM(1997) 176 7dash C4-0213/1997),
7dash having regard to the Commission Communication of 30 April 1997 on consumer health and food
safety and the White Paper of 12 January 2000 on food safety (COM(1999) 719 7dash C5-0136/2000),
7dash having regard to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities referring to the
precautionary principle,
7dash having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee of 12 July 2000(2),
(1) OJ C 206, 21.7.99, p.1.
(2) OJ C 268, 19.9.00, p.6.17.8.2001 EN C 232/345 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday14December2000
7dash having regard to the negotiations under way in the Codex Alimentarius on working principles in the
field of riskanalysis,
7dash having regard to Article 5(7) of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreement on the application
of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS),
7dash having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,
7dash having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy
and the opinions of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy and the Com-mittee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (A5-0352/2000),
A. whereas the Commission has consulted the European Parliament on the question of the use of the
precautionary principle and whereas Parliament should make a constructive and ambitious contribu-
tion to the debate on this issue,
B. whereas Article 152 of the EC Treaty stipulates that a high level of human health protection should be
ensured in the definition and implementation of all Community policies and activities,
C. whereas Article 153 of the EC Treaty stipulates that, in order to promote the interests of consumers
and ensure a high level of consumer protection, the Community should contribute to protecting the
health, safety and economic interests of consumers,
D. whereas Article 174(1) of the EC Treaty stipulates that Community policy on the environment should
contribute to promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or world-wide environ-mental problems, and whereas Article 174(2) stipulates that this policy should aim at a high level ofprotection and be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action
should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the
polluter should pay,
E. whereas Article 6 of the EC Treaty states that environmental protection requirements must be inte-
grated into the definition and implementation of Community policies and activities, in particular witha view to promoting sustainable development,
F. whereas the concept of precaution appears in a number of international agreements and reference has
been made to it in particular:
7dash at the various conferences on the protection of the North Sea in 1987 and 1990,7dash in the 1992 Rio Declaration, adopted within the frameworkof the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED),
7dash in the preamble to the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity,7dash in the 1992 Convention on Climate Change,7dash in the 1992 Paris Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East
Atlantic,
7dash in the Protocol on Biosafety adopted in Montreal in January 2000,
G. whereas the preamble to the agreement by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) stresses the ever-
closer links between international trade and sustainable development and protection and preservation
of the environment,
H. whereas, in particular, with regard to the protection of humans, animal or plant life or health, Article
5(7) of the agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) lays downprovisions for what should be done in cases of riskand inadequate scientific evidence,C 232/346 EN 17.8.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday14December2000
I. whereas reference to the concept of precaution in several of the international agreements cited above
only gives the precautionary principle the status of international customary law and whereas its legalforce needs to be strengthened in order to make it a norm in international law,
J. whereas a clear distinction needs to be made between the precautionary principle and prudence;
whereas the precautionary principle is applicable in situations where the risks of a product or a pro-duction method are unknown; whereas application of the precautionary principle is in theory tempor-
ary, until the riskis k nown,
K. whereas the precautionary principle, as referred to in Article 174 of the EC Treaty, does not yet have a
clear and precise definition,
L. whereas the Commission’s position that the precautionary principle should be defined as a general
principle, without limiting its scope is endorsed; emphasises that, in order to make application ofthe precautionary principle more predictable, a very clear definition of the conditions under whichrecourse to the principle will be permitted is essential; points out that the precautionary principle isbut one of several risk-management tools and that it must be part of an overall policy based on other
factors such as, for instance, traceability or labelling,
M. whereas the communication establishes a reasoned and considered frameworkfor how to proceed in
situations of uncertainty and stipulates that the precautionary principle does not entitle anyone todisregard scientific evidence or take protectionist measures,
N. whereas the Commission proposal that agreement should be reached within the EU on a uniform
procedure for the application of the precautionary principle makes sense, since it would facilitateaction in specific cases; it is also necessary to ensure that Member States can retain existing higherstandards of environmental and health protection,
O. whereas the Commission represents the European Community and speaks on its behalf at the multi-
lateral WTO negotiations on the basis of the mandate given to it,
P. having regard to the legitimate concerns generated among the public by ‘food scandals’, the emergence
of new risks deriving from new technologies and biotechnologies and, in particular, concerns relatingto genetically modified organisms (GMO),
Q. whereas, in our societies, there are differing views as to what constitutes an acceptable level of risk
and therefore calls for a comprehensive dialogue on riskassessment, which must, however, be basedon scientific criteria so that it does not descend into the realms of the arbitrary,
R. whereas the objective of zero riskis unrealistic and whereas scientific uncertainty persists in many
fields,
S. whereas the decision to act or not to act on the basis of the precautionary principle is essentially a
matter for political interpretation,
T. whereas the current decision-making system within the European Community is based on principles
which need to be maintained, developed and extended, by making use of expert scientific opinion andindependent experts and ensuring clear information for and communication with the public,
1. Welcomes the initiative taken by the Commission in producing a communication on the precaution-
ary principle;
2. Endorses the goals of the communication, namely, to determine the factors triggering recourse to the
precautionary principle, the procedure for its application and the criteria for checking that it is beingproperly used, while providing interested parties with guarantees regarding legal certainty;17.8.2001 EN C 232/347 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday14December2000
3. Asks the Commission for an explicit commitment to make active use of the precautionary principle,
whenever appropriate;
4. Calls on the European Union to clarify its approach to using the precautionary principle and calls on
the Council of Ministers to adopt a resolution to this end by the end of the year 2000;
5. Considers that, on the basis of the precautionary principle, the European Union should, in order to
respond to the general public’s pressing demands, undertake to step up scientific research in the sectorswhich are a major cause for concern as far as public opinion is concerned; considers that this may provide
empirical evidence of the potential and/or actual risks of specific physical, chemical and biological agents;
considers that the EU, in addition to its own financial resources and in order to achieve the aforemen-tioned objectives, should askindustry and/or producers of the relevant specific agents to be studied for asmall percentage of the net annual profits from the sale of the ‘items’ (products) directly or indirectly
responsible for the potential health risks for human beings or animals;
6. Wishes to see the Commission ensure that the policies pursued by the European Union comply with
this approach with regard to all criteria and procedures adopted;
7. Urges the Commission to uphold this approach within international organisations, in particular the
WTO;
8. Urges the Commission to monitor the burden of defending precautionary measures 7dash especially for
developing countries 7dash to ensure that it does not reduce the capacity of governments to protect health
and the environment through precautionary action where appropriate;
9. Calls on the Commission to propose, in the frameworkof the WTO, a regulation governing the
relationship between WTO dispute settlement procedures and the corresponding procedures provided for
by other international agreements, and to ensure, in this case, that it is possible, in the context of the WTO
procedures, to invoke other obligations, deriving for example from the Multilateral Environmental Agree-ments (MEAs), in order to extend the scope of the precautionary principle;
10. Considers that, in future, the WTO arbitration body should carry out an assessment of the scientific
studies and expert reports available when it takes its decisions and incorporate this current assessment into
its judgment;
Definition and scope
11. Endorses the Commission’s analysis concluding that the precautionary principle may be invoked
whenever, as a result of incomplete, inconclusive or uncertain scientific information, there are reasonable
grounds for concern at the possible occurrence of effects which are potentially dangerous to the environ-ment or human, animal or plant health and incompatible with the level of protection chosen;
12. Agrees with the Commission as to the general scope of the precautionary principle, which may
apply to all fields of activity of the European Community;
13. Wishes to see the Commission, as from this stage in the deliberations, make a start on studying the
impact of the precautionary principle on liability legislation;
Risk assessment
14. Agrees with the Commission that, before any decision is taken on measures to be adopted, the
decision-maker should have an overview of the available knowledge on the risk of the activity and sub-stance, carried out by experts who are independent of the interested parties, recognised by the interna-tional scientific community for their expertise in the field concerned and appointed by means of a trans-
parent procedure;
15. Insists that the interested parties contribute to a complete and efficient assessment of the riskby
forwarding all the information at their disposal which might prove useful;C 232/348 EN 17.8.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday14December2000
16. Considers that if the precautionary principle is to be applied effectively and credibly, it is important
to involve all key stakeholders, including representatives of civil society as appropriate, in the policychoices that surround its application; calls on the Commission to make the case at the WTO and at theEuropean Court of Justice that in dispute settlements involving the precautionary principle, all key stake-
holders should be granted rights to input relevant information, either in writing or in person, and to
receive information in timely fashion;
17. Considers that the assessment may be performed by one of the existing scientific committees in the
Commission, recognising that these will be restructured in the light of the White Paper on food safety and
that, in addition, consideration should be given to setting up committees currently lacking in the areas ofhuman health and the environment;
18. Calls on the Commission to submit a study of the impact on national and European scientific com-
mittees, gauging the changes likely to be brought about by the application of the precautionary principlein the tasks carried out by such bodies and the links between them;
19. Considers that the experts’ report should describe the assessment method used, together with the
assumptions used as a starting point, the margin of uncertainty adopted and the degree of ignorance;
20. Considers that the conclusions of the assessment should include minority scientific opinions;
21. Stresses that the interested parties should propose at as early a stage as possible replacements for
products deemed to be hazardous and provide objective scientific information to demonstrate that the
alternatives are less harmful than the product to be replaced;
22. Considers it essential that riskassessment procedures be subject to rigorous time limits, and that
immediate interim measures, pending the completion of any such procedure, must be available to the
authorities of the Member States or the Commission, as appropriate and that available measures should
include, but not be limited to, restrictions and bans on import, export, sale or use;
Risk management
23. Recognises that the European Community, in common with the other members of the WHO, is
entitled to determine the desirable level of protection, in particular in the field of environmental protectionand of human, animal and plant health; considers the precautionary principle to be an important policyinstrument in this respect, in accordance with the following assumptions:
(a) the chosen level of protection may not be lower than that laid down by European or international
standards, such as limit values, WHO recommendations and environmental policy targets;
(b) protection of human health and the environment must take precedence over all other considerations;(c) there is no minimum riskthreshold below which the precautionary principle may not be used; accord-
ingly, even in the case of a low risk, the precautionary principle may be invoked;
(d) it is not necessary to demonstrate conclusively a certain cause and effect linkbetween the phenom-
enon or product generating the potential riskand the feared effects;
(e) seeking to attain a zero risk, which in practice is rarely feasible, must not be confused with application
of the precautionary principle;
24. Considers that recourse to the precautionary principle should involve taking the most suitable mea-
sure in the light of the criteria set out by the Commission (proportionality, non-discrimination, consis-
tency, examining costs and benefits, examination of scientific developments); points out the difficulty of
applying these procedures in the face of uncertainty 7dash a problem inherent in any situation demandingrecourse to the precautionary principle; stresses that such principles should not be invoked to overrideconsiderations of human or animal health and welfare, or environmental protection;17.8.2001 EN C 232/349 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday14December2000
25. Calls on the Commission once again to confirm its position that withdrawing a product on the
basis of process or production methods (PPMs) may be a legitimate application of the precautionary prin-ciple and must be compatible with the WTO obligations;
26. Reaffirms the importance of the criterion of proportionality for ensuring that the measure taken is
properly commensurate with the seriousness of the risk, taking account of the level of protection chosenand the potential long-term effects;
27. Considers that the criterion of consistency should not be permanently binding on decision-makers,
but applied with a view to conforming with best practice; nor should it be applied to justify a failure tooffer the highest possible degree of protection of human and animal health and welfare, and of the envir-onment;
28. Stresses that cost-benefit analyses should not be based solely on economic or financial criteria but
should take account of other factors, in particular the cost to the environment or human health of inactionand also the public’s perception of riskand the acceptability of the planned measure;
29. Stresses that most measures taken must be provisional in nature and must be evaluated periodically
in the light of new scientific data; precautionary measures should be maintained as long as the riskpre-vails;
30. Suggests that each measure adopted should include a predetermined assessment timetable and that,
if new scientific facts come to light before the deadline set in the timetable, the measure can neverthelessbe revised as rapidly as possible;
31. Considers that the riskmanager should describe the range of alternative measures considered but
rejected, and detail the reasons for their rejection;
Risk communication
32. Considers that communication with the public should be ensured throughout the whole of the risk
assessment and management processes in as transparent a manner as possible and that all documentation
relating to scientific riskassessment and the riskmanagement stages should be publicly available;
33. Believes that in cases where it is felt appropriate not to adopt measures, the public decision-maker
and the parties concerned should inform the public of this, in particular to dispel any doubts and ambi-
guities which may surround a product or manufacturing process;
34. Believes that the principle of consumer information and choice should be respected and that, where
possible, consumers themselves should be allowed to make informed decisions about the risks of the pro-
ducts they purchase;
Burden of proof
35. Considers that the conditions governing the use of the precautionary principle should be monitored
by Community or national judicial bodies;
36. Endorses the approach taken by the Commission to the burden of proof with regard to the distinc-
tion made between products subject or not subject to prior approval;
37. Considers, however, that, in the case of products not subject to prior approval, the natural or legal
entity contesting the safety of a product should provide evidence in support of his allegations and the
burden of proof may be reversed;
*
**
38. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Economic and
Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the parliaments of the Member States.C 232/350 EN 17.8.2001 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday14December2000