TEXTS ADOPTED
1. EU action plan to combat drugs
A5-0063/1999
European Parliament resolution on the communication from the Commission to the Council, the
European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on aEuropean Union Action Plan to Combat Drugs (2000-2004) (COM(1999) 239 ydash C5-0093/1999 ydash
1999/2095(COS))
The European Parliament,
Vdash having regard to the communication from the Commission of 28 May 1999 on a European Union
ActionPlantoCombatDrugs(2000-2004)(COM(1999)239VdashC5-0093/1999Vdash1999/2095(COS)),hereinafter referred to as the ‘Action Plan’,
Vdash having regard to Article 152 of the EC Treaty,Vdash having regard to Title VI ofthe EU Treaty,
Vdash having regard in particular to Article 34 of the EU Treaty, under which the Commission and the
Member States share the right of initiative in the field of police and judicial cooperation, and in this
instance in combating drugs, thereby broadening the scope of action and the responsibilities of the
Commissionand, by extension, the supervisory power ofthe European Parliament in this field,
Vdash having regard to Article 39 of the EU Treaty, which strengthens the role of Parliament in the legisla-
tive process governing the adoption of framework decisions, decisions and conventions relating, inter
alia, to organised crime and drug trafficking,
Vdash having regard to the incorporation of the Schengen acquisinto the Treaties,
Vdash havingregardtothereportof2June1998,includingkeyelementsofapost-1999EUdrugsstrategy,
to the European Council on activities on drugs and drugs-related issues under the UK Presidency(7930/2/1998Vdash C4-0409/1998),
Vdash having regard to the plan of action of the Council and Commission on how best to implement the
provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice (0692/98 Vdash C4-0692/1998Vdash 1998/0923(CNS)),endorsed by the Vienna European Council in December 1998,
Vdash having regard to the relevant conclusions reached at the European Council meetings in Dublin in
December 1996, in Cardiff in June 1998, in Vienna in December 1998 and in Tampere in October1999,
Vdash having regard to the United Nations Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988 on combating drugs, as
well as the Political Declaration and resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly special ses-sion (Ungass) of 8 to 10 June 1998,
Vdash having regard toCouncilDirective 1992/0109/EECof14December 1992(
1)onthemanufacture and
the placing on the market of certain substances used in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs andpsychotropic substances, as amended by Commission Directive 1993/0046/EEC(
2) and completed by
Commission Regulation No 1485/1996(3), and to Council Regulation (EEC) 3677/1990(4) laying
downmeasurestobetakentodiscouragethediversionofcertainsubstancestotheillicitmanufactureofnarcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, amended by Regulation (EEC) 0900/1992(
5),
(1) OJ L 370, 19.12.1992,p. 76.
(2) OJ L 159, 1.7.1993, p. 134.
(3) OJ L 188, 27.7.1996,p. 28.
(4) OJ L 357, 2.12.1990,p. 1.
(5) OJ L 96, 10.4.1992, p. 1.C 189/256 EN7.7.2000 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
Vdash having regard to the European Union action plan to combatdrugs (1995-1999)(COM(1994) 234),
Vdash havingregardtoDecisionNo102/1997/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCounciladoptinga
programme of Community action on the prevention of drug dependence within the framework foraction in the field ofpublic health (1996-2000)(
1),
Vdash having regard totheCouncilJointActionsof17December 1996(2)concerning theapproximationof
the laws and practices of the Member States of the European Union to combat drug addition and toprevent andcombatillegal drugtrafficking,of16June1997(
3)concerning theinformationexchange,
risk assessment and the control of new synthetic drugs, and of 3 December 1998(4) on money laun-
dering and the identification, tracing, freezing, seizing and confiscation of the proceeds from crime,
Vdash having regard to the other instruments of judicial, police and customs cooperation cited in the com-
munication (pp. 47-49), and in particular to the OISIN, Falcone and Grotius programmes(5),
Vdash having regard to the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Directive
1991/0308/EEConpreventionoftheuseofthefinancialsystemforthepurposeofmoneylaundering(COM(1999) 352),
Vdash having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation (EC) completing Regulation (EEC) 0302/1993
establishing a European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) (COM(1999)430),
Vdash having regard to its resolutions of 15 June 1995(
6) on the communication from the Commission to
theCouncilandtheEuropeanParliamentonaEuropeanUnionplanofactiontocombatdrugs(1995-1999) and of 12 May 1998(
7) on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the
European Parliament on the control of new synthetic drugs (designer drugs), its recommendation tothe Council of 6 October 1998(
8) on European cooperation in the framework of the UN General
Assembly special session (Ungass) on drugs, and its resolution of 13 April 1999(9) on a post-1999
EU drugs strategy on activities on drugs and drugs-related issues under the UK Presidency,
Vdash having regard to the EMCDDA annual reports on the state of the drugs problem in the European
Union,
Vdash having regard to the report of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home
Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy
(A5-0063/1999),
A. whereas this Action Plan sets out five objectives: (1) maintaining the fight against drugs as a ‘major
priority’ for EU internal and external action; (2) an integrated and balanced approach to demand andsupply reduction; (3) procuring comparable data; (4) international cooperation and support for theUnited Nations;and (5) finding ‘appropriate’ resources, ‘while notbidding for new resources’,
B. whereas, however, the ‘major priority’ status which is supposedlyworth maintaining does not feature
inthelegislationoftheUnionorinitsbudgetarycommitment;whereasitisdoubtfulthatthat‘appro-
priate’ resources can be found unless provision is made for additional resources; whereas the ActionPlanthuspaintsanoverlyoptimisticpictureofthecommitmentandrealcapacityoftheUnionanditsMember States to combatdrugs,
(1) OJ L 19, 22.1.1997, p. 25.
(2) OJ L 342, 31.12.1996,p. 6.
(3) OJ L 167, 25.6.1997,p. 1.
(4) OJ L 333, 9.12.1998.
(5) OJ L 7, 10.1.1997, OJ L 99, 31.3.1998and OJ L 287, 8.11.1996 respectively.
(6) OJ C 166, 3.7.1995,p. 116.
(7) OJ C 167, 1.6.1998,p. 29.
(8) OJ C 328, 26.10.1998,p. 43.
(9) OJ C 219, 30.7.1999,p. 109.7.7.2000 EN C 189/257 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
C. whereasitisnotinstruments,programmesorstructureswhicharemostlacking,butratherstrongand
overtly unambiguous political resolve in areas such as external policy, the coordination and strictmonitoring of agreed efforts and a sizeable budgetary commitment; whereas, inter alia, the resources
earmarked in the Community budget for the fight against drugs Vdash some ECU 31 million for socialmeasures and barely ECU 24 million for all cooperation measures in the 1998 budget, according tothe data presented in this Action Plan Vdash are woefully inadequate in comparison with the challengesfaced,
D. whereas theforthcomingPortuguese Presidencyoughttoconveneanextraordinary ‘inter-pillar’ Coun-
cilmeetingtoaddressthefightagainstdrugsandinvitetheapplicantcountriestoattend;whereasthatCouncilshouldmeetonceayearinordertoadoptanambitiouspoliticalanti-drugsprojectsubjecttoa precise timetable; whereas the said Council ought to convene on a yearly basis to assess and adaptthe Plan,
E. whereas without prejudice to the invitation to the Council given by the Tampere European Council
‘to adopt the 2000-2004 European Strategy against Drugs before the European Council meeting inHelsinki’, the European Council should decide in principle to convene the extraordinary ‘inter-pillar’Council meeting referred to above; whereas an interinstitutional conference should be responsible forpreparing it,
F. whereas the need to convene the ‘inter-pillar’ Council can be deduced from conclusion 59 of the
Tampere European Council, which is particularly relevant to action to combat drugs, and states that‘justice and home affairs concerns must be integrated in the definition and implementation of otherUnion policies and activities’ and that ‘allcompetenciesand instrumentsat the disposalofthe Union,and in particular, in external relations must be used in an integrated and consistent way to build upthe area offreedom, security and justice’,
G. whereas the coordinating role in anti-drugs operations entrusted to the Horizontal Drugs Group
(HDG) should be strengthened further; whereas the HDG could become a ‘high-level working group’;whereas it would prove beneficial to establish regular, direct contact between the HDG and the com-petent bodies of the European Parliament in order to further informal interinstitutional coordinationon the issues relating to drug addiction addressedunder this Action Plan,
H. whereas policies for demand reduction, care and social rehabilitation of drug addicts and supply
reduction are not three alternative or contradictory policies, but, rather, inseparable strands withinthe same mainstreaming policy whose ultimate aim is always social and individual wellbeing,
I. whereas this policy canonlybe devised tocover thelongterm andcanonlydeliver resultsgradually,
provided that it makes full use of educational, health and social resources and that the necessarymeans and fundsare made available to it,
J. whereas an essential element of the drugs policy within the EU consists in improving cooperation
between EU institutions, Member States, regions and cities,
K. whereas the raison d’êtreof the fight against drugs lies in helping drug addicts rid themselves of their
dependence; whereas achieving this aim will involve coordination amongst decision-makers in therelentless clampdown on drug traffickers, whose activities currently account for 8% of world trade,according to United Nationsfigures,
L. whereas 80% of organised crime worldwide is linked to drug trafficking; whereas the links between
drug trafficking and arms dealing, dealing in nuclear material, terrorism, the ‘mafia’, corruption and anumber ofarmed groups and official circles are commonknowledge,
M. whereas the abuse of drugs leads to biological, psychological and social problems, illnesses, problems
inthehomeandatwork,criminalacts,trafficaccidents,etc.;whereasyoungpeoplearebeingexposedto the risk of drugs at an increasingly early age; whereas all available means should be employed toprotect the under-18s as a matter of priority and to reduce the number of drug-related deaths;whereasthefightagainstaddictiontooneormoredrugsmustgohandinhandwiththefightagainstalcoholism, whose impact on families and society is alsoparticularly devastating,C 189/258 EN7.7.2000 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
N. whereas action must be taken to combatthe marked increase nowvisible in someEU Member States
in the consumption of alcoholic beverages by young people; whereas this, combined with the use ofdrugs (especially synthetic drugs), is leading to increased juvenile delinquency, more traffic accidents,more failures at school, greater family tensions,etc.,
O. whereastheclampdownshouldnotbeconductedagainstdrugaddictsthemselves,whoshould,onthe
contrary, receive help from society, but rather against the drug traffickers and criminal organisationsresponsiblefordrugproduction,traffickinganddealing, byadaptinglawstomakequick andeffectiveaction in bringing drugs criminals to justice a reality,
P. whereas there can be no anti-drugs policy in the European Union without cooperation with third
countries; whereas internationalagreements oncombatingdrugsandanti-drugs clausesin agreements
concludedbetweentheUnionandthirdcountriesare,therefore,anabsolutepriority;whereas,further-more, development cooperation policy must be revised, so as to bring it into line with the principlesenshrinedinthePoliticalDeclarationissuedbytheUnitedNationsGeneralAssemblyspecialsessioninJune1998;whereasengaging in‘constructivedialogue’undertheguiseof Realpolitikwouldnotsuffice
as a pretext for a laissez-faire policy,
Q. whereas Article 152ofthe ECTreaty (public health) in itsnewly wordedformnowmakesit possible
to conduct varying national programmes to reduce health risks by stipulating that ‘the Communityshall complement the Member States’ action in reducing drug-related health damage, including infor-mation and prevention’; whereas ultimate responsibility for practical measures in regard to treatmentand rehabilitation must lie with the Member State, which also finances the treatment programme,
R. whereas, however, to avoid conveying a confused and counterproductive message, it would be advi-
sable for such programmes to be underpinned by an approach overtly aimed at freeing drug addicts
fromtheir dependence and improving their quality of life,
S. whereasdruguseisathreattopublichealth,includingthatofthedrugaddictsthemselves;whereasif
the number of deaths is to be reduced it is desirable to promote and develop programmes involvingaid,information,rehabilitationanddamagelimitation,whilenotdebarringMemberStatesfromadopt-ing ad hoc measures or pilot schemes,
T. whereas large numbers of drug addicts are currently imprisoned in the EU for drug-related offences
(trafficking,dealing, theft,etc.); whereas itisdesirabletopromoteanddevelopsimilarprogrammestothose proposed in the previous paragraph in the prison context,
U. whereas the EU must encourage medical scientific research which is focussed on improving the
chances of breaking addiction patterns so as to help reduce demand,
V. drawingattentiontotheneedtolinkthefightagainstpovertyandunemploymenttotheproblemsof
drug addiction and urban delinquency, while the subsidiarity principle is observed and respected inregard to matters concerning juvenile and urban delinquency; taking the view that a project of thiskind could form part of action to combat urban delinquency, which Parliament ought to include inthe 2000 budget (line B5-820N),
W. whereas the projects under the programme of Community action on the prevention of drug depen-
dence(1996-2000)andthosetobefundedundertheforthcomingactionprogrammeshouldbeprop-
erly targeted, rigorously assessed and devised to work in synergy with national programmes, in linewith the aims of the action plan,
X. sharing the particular alarm expressed by the Commission at the ‘major reduction of financial com-
mitment by Member States to social sector activities’ (p. 55),
Y. whereas the confiscation of proceeds from drug-related crime should be backed up by the necessary
decisions for those proceeds to be allocated to programmes on prevention and the rehabilitation ofdrug addicts and support programmes for their families,7.7.2000 EN C 189/259 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
Z. whereas there is good reason to exploit every possibility afforded by Article 30 of the EU Treaty
governingpolicecooperation,especiallybyinvolvingEuropol,andbyArticle31ofthesame,whichdeals with common action on judicial cooperation in criminal matters, including the establishmentof minimum rules relating to drug trafficking; whereas the plan of action to establish an area offreedom, security and justice endorsed by the Vienna European Council refers to the establishmentof such rules,
AA. whereas, likewise, the money laundering directive which, on the Commission’sown admission, has
enjoyedonlylimitedsuccessinconfiscatingassets,mustbemadetougheranditsstrictimplementa-tion assured; whereas the fight against money laundering will fail to deliver credible results unlessconducted on an international scale, which does not, however, preclude vigorous action within theEU,
AB. whereasthenewsyntheticdrugsconstituteapotentialdangerandanewproblem,particularlygiven
thediversionoftheirprecursors,manyofthemlicit,forillicitends,theeasewithwhichtheycanbemanufactured and the frequently unusual behavioural patterns of their users; whereas if the effec-tivenessoftheearlywarningsystematEUlevelseemssatisfactory,theresultsoftheactiontowhichit leads in the Member States shouldbe evaluated,
AC. whereas the means must be found to combat the use of the Internet in facilitating drug trafficking
and production; whereas crimes such as drug trafficking should be prosecuted in accordance withapplicable law even if it occurs via services over the Internet,
AD. whereasInternet providers whoremove fromthe Net informationwhich gives rise tocrime should
be awarded a quality symbol to strengthen their competitive position; whereas information whichcombats drug sales and drug abuse is of common interest and should be increased; whereas theMember States should use health information to highlight the health hazards involved in drugabuse,
AE. drawing attention to the impact of new technologies, and especially the Internet, on drug abuse
through the dissemination of information on chemical precursors and the manufacturing of drugs
which is sometimesa direct incitement to drug-taking,
AF. whereasthegrowing problemofdopinginsport,which,besidesconstitutingahealthmatter,raises
legal, judicial and police issues, mustbe included in the European Union’sstrategy and Action Planto Combat Drugs; whereas the Action Plan has paid scant attention to the problem of the harmo-nisation of laws and judicial and police cooperation in this field, goals which a number of sportsministers from the Member States hope to see attained; whereas the willingness of the MemberStates and the Commission‘tohelp in setting up an international agency to deal with this problemin cooperation with sports organisations’, as mentioned in the Commission’sconclusions, does notgo far enough,
AG. whereasthelinkbetween drugtaking androadaccidents shouldleadtoa policyinitiative atUnion
level,
AH. whereas there is good cause to cooperate fully with the United Nations and the UNDCP (United
Nations Drug Control Programme), to subscribe to the principles established in the June 1998UngassPoliticalDeclarationVdashnamelyjointresponsibility,inclusionofdrugcontrolindevelopmentpolicies, a balanced approach to demand reduction and supply reduction, respect for human rights
and multilateral approaches Vdash and to enforce the resolutionsadopted on that occasion,
AI. whereas it is necessary to ensure that, in line with Parliament’s request, the handling of European
Union funding of the UNDCP should not be entrusted to those governments of third countrieswhichfailtoofferguaranteeswithregardtothesoundmanagementofthesaidfundingandrespectfor human rights,
AJ. whereasoneofthemostimportantprerequisites forcombatingdrugsisthereductionofpovertyin
the southern developing countries; whereas all possibleeffortsshouldbe undertaken toremove thesocialandeconomiccausesthatfavourcontinuingdrugproduction;whereasthespecialpreferencesgranted by the European Union in the Andean Pact countries and the countries of central Americaunder the GPS scheme should be extended further, at least to the level granted by the EU to otherC 189/260 EN7.7.2000 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
developing countries; whereas the GPSscheme alone, however, is notsufficient to encourage farm-
ers to shift to other products; whereas communities that have decided to stop the production ofdrugs and raw materials shouldbe granted special support to develop alternatives,
AK. whereas the necessary resources should be allocated for the implementation of the EU/Latin Amer-
ica/Caribbean coordination and cooperation mechanism in the field of drugs adopted at the firstsummit ofheads ofstate and government of the three regions in Rio de Janeiro on 28 June 1999,
AL. whereas, where external policy is concerned, it is vital that resolute and coherent action be devised
andimplementedatEUleveltocombatdrugproductionandtrafficking,firstandforemostthroughmoney laundering agreements and tougher anti-drugs clauses comprising suspension and penaltyarrangements,
AM. whereas the European Union must maintain close contact with the Dublin Group (the Member
States and the Commission,the US, Canada, Japan, Australia and Norway) and its ‘mini-groups’,
AN. whereas, in the context of the pre-accession strategy, it would be advisable to give high priority to
theacquisin the area of freedom, security and justice, and in this case to the acquison combating
drugs; whereas there is a need to re-evaluate the measures under the Phare and Tacis programmesdevoted to combating drugs and strengthen all aspects of cooperation in the fight against drugtrafficking and transit with the applicant countries of central and eastern Europe and all countries
concerned, especially the Balkan states, Russia and the NISs, Turkey and the Maghreb countries;
whereas, as the Commission has proposed, the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and DrugAddiction (EMCDDA) shouldsee its remit extended as soonas possible to include the implementa-tion ofdrug awareness projects fundedunder the PHARE programme,
AO. whereastheadmissionofashortageofresourcesforprogrammestargetingdevelopingnationscon-
trasts with the unfoundedassertion that Communityeffortshave met with considerable success,
AP. whereas,failingadrasticimprovementinthemonitoringoftheinstrumentsandprogrammesunder
theActionPlan,theindispensableconditionforapolicytobeeffectivewillnotbemet;whereas,forevaluation at EU level to be feasible, the Member States must present an exhaustive appraisal oftheir policies, employing transparency equal to that applied in the economic field,
AQ. whereasthepersistentlackofcomparabledataonthedrugsprobleminthevariousMemberStates,
as highlighted once again in the analysis of public spending undertaken in chapter VII of theEMCDDA 1998 Annual Report is alarming,
AR. whereas the EMCDDA has an essential role to play in gathering data and statistics and analysing
policies, legislation and penal practice both in the European Union and in the applicant countries;whereas without comparable data, based on common definitions and concepts, and a budget com-mensurate with the tasks entrusted to it, the Monitoring Centre will be unable to perform its taskoptimally,
AS. whereas at the special meeting on the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice in the
European Union held in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999 the European Council:
Vdash underlined the importance of addressing the drugs problem in a comprehensive manner and
called on the Council ‘to adopt the 2000-2004 European Strategy against Drugs before theEuropean Council meeting in Helsinki’ (conclusion 50),
Vdash called for priority to be given to cooperation in preventing drug-related crime (conclusion 42),Vdash called for joint investigative teams to be set up without delay, as a first step to combat in
particular trafficking in drugs, on the initiative and with the participation of representatives ofEuropol, thus encouraging the proper implementation of the provisions of Article 30(2) EU(conclusions43 and 45),7.7.2000 EN C 189/261 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
Vdash agreed to set up Eurojust Vdash which should act in the matter of judicial cooperation as Europol
acts in police cooperation (conclusion 46),
Vdash designated drugs trafficking as one of the areas in which priority should be given to efforts to
harmonise national criminal law, thus calling for the start of joint action provided for underArticle 31(e) EU (conclusion 48),
Vdash with regard tomoneylaundering, calledforcommonstandardstobe developed toprevent the
use of corporations and entities registered outside the territory of the Union and for arrange-ments to be concluded with third country offshore-centres (conclusion 57),
Vdash stressedtheneedtodefineclearpriorities,policyobjectivesandmeasuresfortheUnion’sexter-
nal action in justice and home affairs (conclusion 61);
Performance and overall aims
1. Shares the objectives of the Action Plan; congratulates the Commission on its honesty in acknowl-
edging shortcomings; considers, however, that it paints an overly optimistic picture of the commitmentand performance ofthe Union and its Member States in combating drugs;
2. Welcomes the long-term and cross-sector strategy in the Commission’s Action Plan which takes
account of the need for further treatment and evaluation; at the same time, however, stresses that thestrategy must be flexible in order to cope with new trends in drug abuse, particularly amongst youngpeople, and that it must alsoinclude approaches geared to the local and regional levels;
Political resolve and the decision-making process
3. Notes that, at present, the overall budgetary resources implemented by the European Union appear
woefully inadequate and the monitoring of action weak; considers that the European Union should beallocated further resources to strengthen its measures to prevent drug addiction, help drug addicts andcombat crime; believes that every Member State should set aside resources for treatment programmes toenable every addict to obtain help to get off drugs in accordance with national conditions; calls on theCommissionto make suitable financial proposalswith a view to facilitating the proposed actions;
4. CallsontheMemberStatesandtheUniontoshowgreater politicalresolveand,iftheneedformore
effective measures to combat drug abuse and drug trafficking cannot be met with existing resources, tocommithigherresourcesontheonehandforinternalaction,notablyintheeducational,social,healthandmedical scientific field, particularly as regards the effects of drugs on health and life expectancy, and, onthe other, for international action; condemns, in the light of Article 6(4) of the EU Treaty which requirestheUnionto‘provideitselfwiththemeansnecessarytoattainitsobjectivesandcarrythroughitspolicies’,the persistent lack of comparable data provided by the Member States on drugs and drug addiction andcalls on them to remedy this situation forthwith;
5. Considers that urban and regional policy experiments on reducing harmful (health) effects, reducing
demandfordrugsandcrimepreventionandinvestigatingtheadverseeffectsonhealthofvariousdrugsareimportant as regards finding new ways ofdealing with drug-related problems;
6. WelcomestheCommission’sobjectivesofreducingdrugabuseamongyoungpeopleandthenumber
ofdeathsamongaddictsbutregretsthelackofclarificationregarding themeasures,timetablesandfollow-up strategies needed to achieve those objectives; calls therefore on the Commission to elaborate on itsobjectives in this respect;
7. CallsontheCommissiontoinvolvenon-governmentalorganisationsinimplementingtheactionplan
in order to maintain an integrated and balanced anti-drug strategy in which reductions of supply anddemand are regarded as mutually reinforcing factors;
8. Calls on those Member States which, according to UN statistics, are transit countries for drug traf-
ficking to clamp downon such activity as soonas possible;C 189/262 EN7.7.2000 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
9. Calls on the forthcoming Portuguese Presidency to convene an extraordinary ‘inter-pillar’ Council
meetingdevotedtocombatingdrugsandtoinvitetheapplicantcountriestoattend;callsontheEuropeanCouncil meeting in Helsinki to decide in principle on this convocation; calls for an interinstitutional con-ference to be responsible specifically for preparing this ‘inter-pillar’ Council meeting;
10. CallsonthesaidCouncil,whichshouldmeetonceayear,tosignalclearlyitsrefusaltoconsiderthe
drug problemasinevitable byadopting anambitiouspolitical anti-drugs project subject toa precise time-table;
11. Calls on the ‘inter-pillar’ Council to examine each year, on the basis of an EMCDDA report, the
progress in implementation by the Monitoring Centre of a global information system on drugs and todevelop the methodologicaltoolsneeded for implementation;
Specific objectives and international action
12. Emphasises the need to use all available means to protect the under-18s as a matter of priority
through preventive work and focusing on rehabilitative measures for addicted parents of minors, to con-siderincreasingCommunityandnationalbudgets,andpursuemeasurestargetingnewsyntheticdrugs;asksfor early prevention measures to be taken in schools as part of coordinated action amongst the MemberStates; calls for the Comenius programme to make a greater contribution in this vein;
13. Considersthatthe rehabilitation ofdrug addictsis, like other measures, offundamentalimportance
in the fight against drugs, since it helpstocurb demand;tothis end, supportsandencourages the impor-
tant social work carried out by therapeutic communities in helping addicts recover, and considers that
their capacity to take action must be stepped up;
14. Calls on the Commission, in implementing the action plan, to emphasise the need to intensify
effortsin the Member Statestocombatdrug-abuse in prisons,in which care, measures topromotereinte-gration into society and working life, access to drug-free units and the possibility of converting a prisonsentence into treatment shouldbe seen as important elements;
15. Callsonthe Commissiontoevaluate the various approaches totreatment andtointroduce a range
of different treatment programmes with individualised criteria for admission and the objective of non-dependence on drugs;
16. Callsonthe Member Statestoimplement programmes to protect public and individual health, and
measures to treat drug addicts in prison;
17. Supports the research priorities outlined for drugs under the fifth framework programme and
wishes also to include the social aspects of production, the reduction of health risks of drug use and theevaluation of a multilateral approach designed to restrict trade and production;
18. UrgestheEuropeanUniontoapplyacoherentpolicytocombatdrugproductionandtraffickingin
aconsistentmanner,using itscapacity forbringing politicalinfluence tobear andproviding effective helptothecountriesconcerned; insiststothisendontheurgent needforbroadercoordinationinthefieldsofjustice and home affairs and ofexternal policy, in particular development and trade policy;
19. Calls on the EU and its Member States to encourage and develop damage limitation policies, with-
out debarring individual Member States fromadopting measures and pilot schemes in this area;
20. Favours the strengthening and rigorous evaluation ofaction onmoneylaundering; stressesthe role
which Europol and, in due course, Eurojust should play to this end in conjunction with the EuropeanJudicial Network; calls on the European Union to work towards making this action a priority at interna-tional level and towards concluding bilateral and multilateral money laundering agreements; reiterates itsrequest that the fundsconfiscated from criminals be allocatedto programmes to combatdrug addiction;7.7.2000 EN C 189/263 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
21. Considers that FATF plays an essential part in combatting money laundering and that its mandate
shouldbe extended for a further five years;
22. CallsontheUnionandMemberStatestocooperateconstructivelywiththeUnitedNationsandthe
UNDCP and in particular to apply the principles contained in the Political Declaration and resolutions ofthe June 1998 United Nations General Assembly special session (Ungass) on combating drugs; hopes, inthis respect, to see the respective responsibilities of the European Union and the Member States in enfor-cing those resolutions made clear;
23. Reiterates its request that the handling of European Union funding of the UNDCP should not be
entrusted to those governments of third countries which fail to offer guarantees with regard to the soundmanagement ofsaid funding and respect for human rights;
24. Calls for meticulous checks on compliance with the anti-drugs clause in international agreements;
asksto that effect that it be accorded the same ‘essential clause’ status as the ‘human rights’ clause;
25. Expects that the control on the external trade of chemicals based on Council Regulation (EEC)
3677/90 and Commission Regulation (EEC) 3769/92 and on a number of precursor control agreementsconcludedwith eightcountries oftheorganisationofAmerican Stateswillbeextendedtoothercountries;
26. CallsfortheinclusionwithintheActionPlanofan‘inter-pillar’initiative ondopinginsport,which
should also address the harmonisation of laws, the involvement of sports organisations and judicial andpolice cooperation as well as comprising preventive measures and public health initiatives, also for ama-teur sport;
27. Calls for use to be made of Article 71(1)(c) of the EC Treaty so as to harmonise provisions in the
Member States’ highway codes relating to road accidents caused by drug taking;
Pre-accession strategy
28. Deplores the rise of new drugs markets and trafficking syndicates in the countries of central and
easternEuropeencouragedbytheeconomicandpoliticaldifficultiesinsomeofthesecountriesandinsistson the importance of the PHARE multibeneficiary drugs programmes;
29. Emphasises that the pre-accession strategy must give high priority to the fight against drugs; stres-
ses, however, that the evaluation made hitherto of the success of the projects funded from the measuresunderthePHAREandTACISprogrammesdevotedtocombatingdrugs,whichreceivedECU11and4mil-lion in 1998, has by and large proven inadequate; calls for a fundamental review of these measures;approvestheCommissionproposalregardingthebroadinvolvementoftheapplicantcountriesandTurkeyin the EMCDDA;
Evaluation
30. Demands that the Commissionbegin the systematic and rigorous monitoring and evaluation of all
action pursued in the fight against drugs, including action taken at international level, drawing in particu-larontheexpertiseoftheEMCDDA;urgestheMemberStatestopresentanexhaustiveannualappraisaloftheirpolicies;urgestheCommissiontosubmitanannualreportonthisbasis,settingoutacomprehensivereview ofaction to combat drugs, sothat the policies pursued in this field can be compared;
31. CallsontheCommissiontofundprogrammestoevaluatethepracticesusedinthefieldsofpreven-
tion, treatment and reintegration as well as the social and health implications and, on the basis of itsconclusions,to help the Member States frame their national policies;
Role and resources of the EMCDDA
32. Calls on the EMCDDA to contribute fully towards the systematic monitoring of the above-men-
tioned anti-drug actions, to expand its assistance to the Member States in evaluating their activities toreduce demand, to implement the five harmonised epidemiological indicators, to strengthen its systemfor evaluating the risks posed by the new synthetic drugs and broaden its scope to cover the risks linkedC 189/264 EN7.7.2000 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999
to performance-enhancing drugs; calls therefore for the EMCDDA to be equipped with the harmonised
statistics and resources it needs to carry out its task;
*
**
33. Calls on the European Council to consider this resolution as recommendations for its meeting in
Helsinki; reserves the right to react, before the meeting of the ‘inter-pillar’ Council which it demandsshould be convened, to the general guidelines which the European Council will have laid down in thefight against drugs;
34. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Commission and
Council, and the parliaments and governments ofthe Member States and applicant countries.
2. Counterfeit travel documents *
A5-0050/1999
Initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to the adoption of a Council Decision
on the improved exchange of information to combat counterfeit travel documents (8457/1999 ydash
C5-0011/1999 ydash 1999/0804(CNS))
The initiative was amended as follows:
INITIATIVE OF THE FRG(1) AMENDMENTS BY PARLIAMENT
(Amendment 1)
Title
Initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to
the adoption of a Council Decisionon the improved exchange
of informationto combat counterfeit travel documentsInitiative of the Federal Republic of Germany with a view to
the adoption of a Council Regulation on the improved
exchange of information to combat counterfeit travel docu-
ments
(Amendment 11)
First citation
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union , and in particu-
lar Article 34(2)(c)thereof,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community, and in particular Article 66thereof,
(Amendment 3)
Recital 2a (new)
(2a) the Commission announced in its statement on this
Joint Action that it would adopt the necessary initiativesto develop the European image archiving system after theentry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty;
(Amendment 4)
Recital 2b (new)
(2b) in the long term it would not be rational to allow
two parallel systems for exchanging information aboutforged documents to remain in existence;
(1) OJ C 176, 22.6.1999,p. 1.7.7.2000 EN C 189/265 Official Journal ofthe European Communities
Friday 19 November 1999