WRITTEN QUESTION E-3578/95 by Edith Müller (V) and Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Council (10 January 1996)

Subject: EU arms embargo against Nigeria

On 16 November 1995, the Council of the European Union reconfirmed and strengthened the arms embargo of the Union and its Member States against Nigeria. However, once again arms deals negotiated in the part are exempted from the embargo.

What military materials were delivered by EU Member States to Nigeria between the EU arms embargo of 1993 and that of 1995, by which of the Member States and to what total value? How were these deals financed, and to what extent have they contributed to the Nigerian external debt mountain? For which cases, if any, was a 'presumption of denial' implemented? Does the Council consider the delivery of armoured vehicles from France (1994), self-propelled artillery from Italy (1994) and main battle tanks from England (1994) as a breach of the 1993 embargo? Would the delivery of 300 armoured personnel carriers recently ordered from Austria be a breach of the newly imposed embargo or a violation of the European Council's existing eight arms criteria, agreed in 1991, including 'respect for human rights in the country of final destination' and 'the internal situation in the country of final destination, as a function of the existence of tensions or internal armed conflicts'?

How are dual-use goods affected by the new embargo, or will they not be affected? Does the embargo include production-licences, spare parts, logistical support, maintenance and training? Does the embargo cover only lethal equipment? Does the embargo cover non-lethal equipment (rubber bullets), police equipment, including riot control equipment and toxicological agents (CS gas), as well as torture equipment?

Reply (11 June 1996)

In the statement on Nigeria published on 19 November 1993, in which the European Union condemned the fact that the democratic process in Nigeria had been interrupted through the resumption of power by a military dictatorship, the European Union decided to examine without delay the consequences of the setback to the democratic process in Nigeria.

In a press release published on 7 December 1993, the Presidency announced, on behalf of the European Union, that the Member States of the European Union, inter alia, would make a case-by-case examination, with a presumption of refusal, of all new export licences for defence equipment. The Member States of the Union agreed that this measure on defence equipment would apply to all categories of arms, ammunition and military equipment, i.e. weapons designed to kill and ammunition for them, weapon platforms, non-weapon platforms and auxiliary equipment.

Under the common position on Nigeria, adopted on 20 November 1995 (on the basis of Article J.2 of the TEU), the Council decided to introduce an embargo on Nigeria. The embargo covers not only weapons designed to kill and ammunition for them, weapon platforms, non-weapon platforms and auxiliary equipment but also parts, repairs, maintenance of equipment and military technology transfer. Contracts concluded before the date of entry into force of the embargo are not affected by the common position. The arms embargo does not apply to dual-use goods, but the European rules in force nonetheless require the export of such goods to be subject to authorization.

As the Honourable Member is aware, it is up to Member States, who apply controls on arms exports at national level, to put this decision into practice. The Council has not been informed of any sales by Member States of the Union of goods in the categories covered by the various restrictive measures agreed on by the Union.