ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/414

(2004/C 88 E/0420)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2486/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(25 July 2003)

Subject: Violation of religious freedom in Uzbekistan with respect to Adventists and members of the Asia Protestant Church

Given that:

— five months after a raid on their small congregation in Nukus, capital of Karakalpakstan, an autonomous republic in north-western Uzbekistan, and more than two months after being fined, a group of Adventists has been summoned to appear in court in Nukus on 20 July 2003.

— the Nukus Prosecutor, Sultan Ibragimov, is refusing to provide any information on the reasons for this summons.

— the official responsible for religious affairs, Nurula Jamalov, has admitted that the material confiscated from the Adventists during the raid will not be distributed in Uzbekistan.

— on 21 June 2003 Nelya Denisova, a member of the Asia Protestant Church, was questioned for four hours by an official of the National Security Service (formerly KGB). The NSS has forbidden her to divulge what was said at the interrogation.

— the Asia Protestant Church has not yet succeeded in obtaining the registration which would allow it to operate legally on the grounds that Article 8 of Uzbekistan's Law on Religion requires pastors to receive specific religious training.

In view of the excellent economic and trade relations between the European Union and Uzbekistan, will the Commission state:

— whether it is aware of the serious and repeated violations of religious freedom in Uzbekistan and of the above incidents?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/290

(2004/C 78 E/0290)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3480/03

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Civil rights of disabled people

Can the Commission outline what measures it is taking to progress the civil rights of disabled people?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2004)

Articles 21 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union makes specific reference to the rights of people with disabilities.

Community action for people with disabilities follows a rights based approach aiming at achieving equal opportunities. The various measures undertaken by the Commission thus contribute directly or indirectly to the protection and promotion of the rights of people with disabilities. The Commission's Communication ‘Equal opportunities for people with disabilities: A European Action Plan (1)’ reflects this approach.

More specifically, the rights of people with disabilities are directly concerned in relation to a number of Community measures:

— In the area of anti-discrimination, Article 13 of the Amsterdam Treaty is the basis for taking ‘appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.’ The Article is not specially designed for people with disabilities but takes a horizontal approach with regard to measures against discrimination. Within this framework, the Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (2) as well as Council Decision 2000/750/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a Community action programme to combat discrimination (2001 to 2006) were adopted (3). The Commission intends to launch a public consultation (Green Paper) in Spring 2004 on the future strategy to combat discrimination.

— The Council Decision 2001/903/EC of 3 December 2001 on the European Year of People with Disabilities 2003 (4) stipulates in Article 2 its objectives as — inter alia — ‘to raise awareness of the rights of people with disabilities to protection against discrimination and to full and equal enjoyment of their rights.’

— Through its Communication ‘Towards a United Nations legally binding instrument to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities’ (5), the Commission has underlined its support for further progress regarding the rights of people with disabilities.

(1) COM(2003) 0650 final.

(2) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(3) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(4) OJ L 335, 19.12.2001.

(5) COM(2003) 0016 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/123

(2004/C 78 E/0125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2540/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(30 July 2003)

Subject: Agreements between the Spanish State and the Vatican State which violate fundamental rights

The questioner would like to refer to:

— Articles 6(1) and 6(2) of the EU Treaty, Articles 226 and 307 of the EC Treaty

— Articles 1(1), 14,16 and 27(3) of the Spanish Constitution; and

— Articles 6, 10, 21 and 14(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.

Knowing that:

— the application of certain agreements concluded between the Vatican State and the Spanish State in 1976 and 1979 is giving rise to a violation of the fundamental rights of equality freedom and nondiscrimination protected under EU law and the Spanish Constitution;

— by virtue of the Agreement concerning Economic Affairs, the Catholic Church enjoys tax benefits and exemptions that are not enjoyed by any other religious faith in Spain, which constitutes religious discrimination against the other religious faiths registered in that country;

— in addition to giving rise to a violation of the fundamental right protected under Article 14(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and Article 27(3) of the Spanish Constitution, the Agreement on Education and Cultural Affairs, through laws such as the Organic Law on Quality in Education, contravenes Article 16(2) of the Spanish Constitution and Article 3(2) of Royal Decree 2438/1994, as was established by the Supreme Court of the Canaries (TSJC) in its judgment No 153/2003.

Is the Commission aware of the above facts, and if it has taken them into consideration and assessed them, what conclusions does it draw from this assessment?

Does it consider the agreements between the Holy See and the Spanish State to be incompatible with the EC Treaty and the EU Treaty and does it believe that the Kingdom of Spain has taken all appropriate steps to remove the incompatibilities?

Does it believe that complaints against infringements of the Constitution should be brought only through the country's national law, or can they be taken into consideration by the Community institutions as serious violations of the rule of law and democracy?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

The Commission would point out that the matters to which the Honourable Member refers concern the status granted by the Spanish State to religions, and in particular the Catholic religion. These matters do not, therefore, fall within the scope of European Union law.

Accordingly, any incompatibilities with religious freedom that might come to light in this connection must be dealt with at national level.
1.

Information on incidence of post-polio syndrome, treatments and patient groups is available through projects supported under the Community public health programmes. The Parliament and Council adopted a Programme of Community Action for rare diseases on 29 April 1999 (1). Twenty-four 24 projects have been conducted under this former programme. These can be found at the Europa Website: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_projects/rarediseases_project_en.htm). Decision No 1786/2002/EC of the Parliament and Council of 23 September 2002 adopting a programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003-2008) (2) includes addressing rare diseases as an important objective. Rare diseases are defined as of genetic origin, life-threatening or of a chronically debilitating nature which are of such low prevalence that special combined efforts are needed to address them. As a guide, low prevalence is taken as prevalence of less than 5 per 10 000 in the Community. As regards rare disease projects, that programme prioritises actions of a generalist nature that result in the centralisation of information on many rare diseases and not just on a specific group of diseases or single diseases. Unfortunately, and it is the case for the majority of the single rare diseases, no registers or regular surveys exist which routinely give information on the incidence or prevalence of the post-polio syndrome in the Member States. The studies used by the Commission suggest that 20 % to 40 % of people who recover from polio go on to develop post-polio syndrome (PPS). The incidence is estimated as 0,12/10 population with case rates (PPS/polio survivors). Experts appear to be unable to establish a firm incidence rate for the whole population.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/44

(2004/C 84 E/0049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3015/03

by Armando Cossutta (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Third-party insurance for cars and the new Code

In Italy the recent introduction of new sanctions in connection with the Highway Code has radically altered the behaviour of Italian drivers and drastically reduced the number of accidents reported.

Four consumers' associations in Italy (Aduc, Codacons, Adusbef and Federconsumatori) point out that the sharp fall in the number of claims (which insurers say are the cause of the rising cost of third-party insurance) should lead to a fall in the cost of car insurance. The provisions of the new Highway Code have cut the number of accidents by 20 % and the number of people injured by 40 %, which has eased the burden on insurance companies.

However, illogically, the costs of third-party insurance in Italy continue to rise and average rates in other European countries are 20 % lower.

In the light of this, does not the Commission consider that the rise in (compulsory) third-party insurance premiums in Italy is unjustified?

Does it intend to try to persuade the Italian government to take urgent measures to lower the price of third-party insurance?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-3014/03 and E-3015/03

given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 2003)

The Honourable Member is requested to refer to the Commission's answers to written questions P-0592/02 from Ms Thyssen (1), E-1522/03 from the Honourable Member (2) and E-2405/03, E-2406/03 and E-2407/03 from Mr Staes (3). These replies continue to reflect the Commission's position.

(1) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 47.

(2) OJ C 33 E, 6.2.2004, p. 128.

(3) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 405.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/343

(2004/C 88 E/0349)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1247/03

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Burmese refugees

Is the Commission aware of the current plight of Burmese refugees inside Thailand?

Constituents have raised concerns around the Thai Government's inability to cope with the refugees and the Government's desire to close the refugee camps and return them across the border. Is the European Union providing any financial or diplomatic support to the Thai Government or the refugees to prevent a human rights disaster?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 2003)

The Commission is well aware of the situation of Burmese refugees, mainly of ethnic minority origin, sheltered in camps on the Thai-Burma border.

The Commission is currently one of the most important donors to the Burmese refugee population in Thailand. Its assistance, implemented by European non-governmental organisations (NGOs), predominantly takes the form of provision of food and basic goods teamed with medical assistance and training. During the last years the Commission has provided between EUR 7 and 7,5 million per year to these activities.

The Commission Delegation in Thailand follows the situation of the Burmese refugees very closely, through direct visits to the camps and via frequent contacts with NGOs and other organisations supporting the refugee population.

In addition, the Commission continues to have an open dialogue with the Thai authorities about the situation in the refugee camps and on its policy towards the Burmese refugees. Its concerns regarding the treatment of Burmese refugees and reports of forced deportations by Thai authorities have been raised in recent bilateral meetings, such as the Community-Thailand Senior Officials' Meeting which took place on 29 and 30 January 2003 in Brussels.

The Commission will continue to monitor the situation and remains ready to take further action should the situation of the Burmese refugees deteriorate dramatically.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/790

(2004/C 78 E/0841)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3213/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 October 2003)

Subject: Take-up of Community funding in the cultural sector in Greece

Can the Commission indicate the precise take-up of Community funding allocated under the second and third Community support framework (CSF) in the cultural sector in Greece? What are the principal cultural initiatives which have received such funding in Greece and what exact amounts have been allocated to each under the third CSF?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2003)

Interventions in Greece under the Structural Funds in the cultural sector under the second and third Community Support Frameworks (CSF) aim to protect and develop the cultural heritage, develop modern culture and achieve a balanced development in the regional supply of, and demand for, cultural goods and services.

In terms of allocations to the cultural sector, the position is as follows:

— under the second CSF: EUR 208 million;

— under the third CSF: EUR 960 million.

The projects concerned relate to improving the buildings and technological infrastructure in existing museums, protecting and developing monuments and archaeological sites and reinforcing modern culture infrastructure and institutional structures.

Under the third CSF, interventions in this field are supported under the ‘Culture’ Operational Programme and the ‘Information Society’ Operational Programme. Additional actions can also be supported within the various regional operational programmes.

The Operational Programme for Culture has an allocation of EUR 604 million. It includes allocations for museums (EUR 192 million), archaeological sites (EUR 165 million), cultural centres (EUR 117 million) and the Athens and Thessalonica concert halls (EUR 114 million) and technical assistance (EUR 16 million).

The Operational Programme for the Information Society includes cultural actions with an allocation of EUR 129 million.

Under the regional operational programmes cultural interventions are allocated some EUR 227 million.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/462

(2004/C 88 E/0474)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3369/03

by Cees Bremmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 November 2003)

Subject: Detention of EU citizen in Thailand

Is the Commission aware of the sentencing of a European citizen, the Netherlands national Machiei Kuijt, to life imprisonment for alleged drugs dealing? Is the Commission aware that this sentence was handed down in appeal proceedings brought by the Thai Public Prosecutor after a lower Thai court had acquitted Machiei Kuijt in March 2002, and that neither the convicted man nor his counsel, Geert-Jan Knoops, has so far been allowed to see the grounds for the court's decision?

Is the Commission aware of the extremely inhumane conditions in which Machiei Kuijt has been held since 1997 in Klong Prem prison in Bangkok, where a strict regime of public corporal punishment is in force, murder and rape are everyday occurrences, water is scarce and visits by relatives have so far been permitted only twice a year?

Does the Commission agree that the above facts constitute a serious violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (particularly Articles 10 and 14), to which Thailand has been a party since 29 January 1997?

Will the Commission at the earliest possible opportunity bring pressure to bear on the Thai authorities to seek a fair and public judicial procedure and prevent Machiei Kuijt's being held in such inhumane conditions?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2003)

The Commission, through its Delegation in Bangkok, has been following the case of Mr Machiei Kuijt in close liaison with the Embassy of the Netherlands in Thailand.

The Commission is aware of the recent judicial developments in this case and of the conditions of Mr Kuijt's imprisonment referred to by the Honourable Member.

The Commission does not get involved in cases of a consular nature, nor does it take a position, unless in the context of a Union démarche previously agreed with the Member States.

In the Commission's view, as indicated in its reply to written question E-2775/03 by Mr Maaten (1), the competence to intervene in Mr Kuijt's case lies primarily with the Dutch authorities.

The Commission would therefore suggest that the Honourable Member might wish to discuss this issue in the first place with the Dutch Government.

(1) See page 114.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/143

(2004/C 84 E/0181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4070/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(14 January 2004)

Subject: Conventions, Charter and Constitution: the costs

A great deal of work was done at European level to draft a new treaty entitled ‘Constitution for Europe’. The same can be said for the preparation, prior to that, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is now supposed to form Part II of the Constitution.

With reference to:

— the two Conventions, and

— the public information campaigns carried out all over the European Union, including the publication of both documents,

can the Commission say:

— whether it can supply comprehensive information broken down by sector, about the costs incurred in the preparation and presentation of the Charter and Constitution and borne by the Community budget in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003;
9.

Where substantial amounts of money are at stake in complex subsidy schemes, it is impossible for the Commission or any other body to absolutely guarantee that fraud will not be attempted or occur. It should be noted, however, that since 1992 the Common Organisation of the Market (COM) of the raw tobacco sector has been profoundly reformed. Among other changes, the three mechanisms which had given rise to fraudulent activities — and in particular intervention and sale by auction, export refunds and differential primia according to variety — have been stopped. See Regulation (ECC) No 2075/92 (1). The structure of the COM was later simplified in 1996 and in 1998. See Regulation (EC) No 415/96 of 4 March 1996 (2) and Regulation (EC) No 1636/98 of 20 July 1998 (3). The Commission regularly carries out discharge exercises and preventive audits.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/802

(2004/C 78 E/0851)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3318/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 November 2003)

Subject: Issuing of EUR 1 banknotes

In its answer to my question No E-2628/02 (1), the Commission states that The possibility of EUR 1 or EUR 2 notes has no real support anywhere other than in Greece and Italy and comes up against strong opposition in some countries'. The recent meeting (7 October 2003) of the eurozone Ministers for Economic Affairs and Finance at the European Central Bank discussed speeding up the process of introducing a EUR 1 banknote.

Can the Commission specify the date on which EUR 1 banknotes will be issued?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2003)

According to Article 106(1) of the EC Treaty the European Central Bank (ECB) has the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes. Decisions on banknote denominations are therefore the responsibility of the ECB.

The Governing Council of the ECB decided on 24 April 2003 to put on hold the decision on the use of very low-denomination banknotes on the following grounds:

— a change in the denominational structure of the banknotes and coins shortly after the cash changeover is not advisable in view of the significant adaptation costs economic agents had to bear due to the cash changeover in 2002;

— the Eurosystem acknowledges the existence of some public support for the introduction of low-denomination euro banknotes, although limited, at this stage;

— the issuance of very low-denomination euro banknotes should be considered only after a few years when more experience on the use of euro banknotes and coins is available.

If a low-denomination banknote were issued, this would imply a parallel circulation between the same coin and banknote denomination. The ECB will reconsider this subject in autumn 2004.

(1) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 30.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/55

(2004/C 88 E/0059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2083/03

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 June 2003)

Subject: Violations of Greek air space by Turkish aircraft and security of the inhabitants of the Aegean

During a recent visit to the border islands of Samos and Ikaria I experienced the deep anxiety felt by the inhabitants at the constant, provocative violations of Aegean air space by Turkish warplanes and the impact which they have on the lives and security of the local people as well as their livelihood in the tourist industry.

The alarm was compounded, in particular, following the recent incident in which two Turkish F16 fighters harassed an Olympic Airways flight bound for Istanbul from Athens.

What view does the Commission take of Turkey's conduct in this respect and what measures will it take forthwith to put an end to such violations by Turkey?

What measures will it take to address the insecurity felt by European citizens living in or travelling through the Aegean and to restore normality and peace to the wider region?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-1984/03, E-2050/03 and E-2083/03

given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 August 2003)

As an EU Candidate Country, Turkey has undertaken to comply with the criteria for accession.

In terms of the specific issue raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission recalls the principle of peaceful settlement of border disputes and other related issues as established under paragraph 4 of the Helsinki European Council Conclusions in December 1999.

Under the revised Accession Partnership with Turkey, adopted on 19 May 2003 (1), there is a specific priority relating to this principle.

The Commission is monitoring closely the progress achieved by Turkey in this and other areas and will make a detailed assessment in its Regular Report to be published on 5 November 2003.

(1) OJ L 145, 12.6.2003.