WRITTEN QUESTION E-2952/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 October 2002)

Subject: Hearing of Pascal Lamy by the Commission's Anti-Fraud Unit

In its answer to my Written Question E-1771/02(1), the Commission once again ducked out of giving an answer to my query as to whether or not minutes were kept of the meeting held on 20 November 1997 between Pascal Lamy and UCLAF officials. During his hearing by the European Parliament in the summer of 1999 prior to his appointment as Commissioner, Mr Lamy made no reference to that meeting when he was asked, inter alia, about what is known as the security services affair and called upon to supply a list of all the meetings that he had held with Commission officials when he was a member of the Board of Directors of Crédit Lyonnais.

In response to my question about the minutes of that meeting, the Commission simply answered that OLAF did not have any such minutes. However, that does not necessarily mean that no minutes of that meeting were kept. As the Commission is aware, when UCLAF became OLAF, a number of sensitive documents were lost in mysterious circumstances, a situation which apparently also resulted in internal inquiries being conducted (see my Written Question E-0963/02(2)).

Accordingly, I am obliged to repeat the questions I asked in my Written Question E-1771/02:

1. Has the Commission checked directly with Commissioner Lamy and with the Commission officials involved whether or not minutes were kept of the meeting of 20 November 1997?

2. If it has not done so, will the Commission immediately and directly ask Commissioner Lamy and the officials involved whether or not minutes were kept of that meeting and, where appropriate, what has become of them?

In its answer to my Written Question E-1771/02, the Commission confirmed its refusal to forward to me certain documents connected with the security services affair. According to the Commission, current investigations must not be hampered. At the same time, the Commission informed me that investigations initiated by order of the Brussels Public Prosecutor's Office had resulted in the procedure being suspended. Can the Commission indicate which investigations are still up and running in this instance?

(1) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 159.

(2) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 63.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2003)

1. Yes, the Commission has undertaken to find out whether minutes were kept of the meeting of 20 November 1997.

2. See point 1 above and the answers to the Honourable Member's Written Questions E-1771/02(1) and E-0645/02(2).

The Commission has already informed the Honourable Member of the various internal investigations, disciplinary procedures and judicial proceedings related to the contract concluded with Group 4 Securitas. The Commission's lawyer lodged an appeal against the decision taken on 19 March 2002 by the Chambre du Conseil of the Brussels Court of First Instance to dismiss the case. The Brussels Court of Appeal's Chamber for Indictments confirmed in a ruling of 28 May 2002 that the case had been dismissed.

As for requests for access to certain documents relating to the security service affair, the Commission has already replied to the Honourable Member's Written Questions E-2489/01(3), P-3450/01(4), E-0645/02 and E-1771/02.

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) now confirms that there are no longer any investigations under way within OLAF concerning relations between Group 4 Securitas and the Commission, and that the legal case opened by the Belgian authorities is also closed. However, two cases related to the Security Office dossiers are currently pending before the Court of First Instance.

(1) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 159.

(2) OJ C 205 E, 29.8.2002, p. 183.

(3) OJ C 115 E, 16.5.2002, p. 99.

(4) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002, p. 233.