WRITTEN QUESTION E-0040/98 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Council (28 January 1998)

Subject: Nigeria's participation in international sports events

By Decision 97/821/CFSP ((OJ L 338, 9.12.1997, p. 8. )) the Council of the European Union extended its earlier decision to exclude Nigeria from international sports events. Even though this restriction is hardly enough to influence the country's military dictatorship - it would take an oil embargo to do this - it is a good thing for the EU to distance itself from the regime in this way. It is therefore very unfortunate that the Council should have given an exemption in respect of the 1998 football world cup. Few sports attract so much international attention as football and rejection of Nigeria in this connection would not fail to affect the regime. One argument put forward for the decision is that the tournament had got under way before the common position was defined. But the fact that Nigeria took part in the qualifying round cannot be allowed to mean that, come what may, it should be given an exemption for the finals in summer 1998! In 1992, for example, Yugoslavia was excluded from the European championships because of the civil war although it had already qualified for the finals. In view of this, why should the rules be changed now?

Does the Council intend to tighten up the restrictions against Nigeria and exclude the country from the 1998 football world cup?

Answer (27 April 1998)

The European Union has repeatedly expressed its grave concern at the situation in Nigeria. The Council of Ministers reflected this on 28 November 1997 with its decision to extend the EU Common Position on Nigeria of 4 December 1995 (95/544/CSFP) until 1 November 1998.

The Council remains firmly committed to securing change in Nigeria, to which it believes the measures against Nigeria in Common Position 95/544/CSFP, including the interruption of EU-Nigeria sporting links, are making a useful contribution. The Council has also taken careful note of the Resolution of the European Parliament concerning human rights in Nigeria adopted at its 15-19 December 1997 session.

As host nation of the World Cup finals, France had, before the adoption of Common Position 95/544/CSFP, entered into binding commitments with the Federation of International Football Associations (FIFA) to admit the national teams of all those countries which reached the finals. Against this background the Council agreed that Member States could decide not to apply the ban on sporting links in order to fulfil prior undertakings given in respect of sporting events organised by international sports federations, that is to say the 1998 world Cup and matches already organised in preparations for it and also the 1998 World Basketball Championships. But this implied no change in EU policy towards Nigeria and no relaxation of EU measures against it. Indeed, the Council's Conclusions of 28 November 1997 accompanying the Decision to renew Common Position 95/544/CSFP make it clear that if elections in Nigeria this year fail to permit a return to democracy and the rule of law before 1 October 1998, the EU will adopt measures in addition to those adopted in Common Position 95/544/CSFP.

The comparison of this case to the one of Yugoslavia in the 1992 European Football championships, which the Honourable Member makes in his question, does not seem fully relevant, since the decision to exclude Yugoslavia was taken by the FIFA and not by the EU, and since there was uncertainty as to whether the State that the national team of Yugoslavia represented still existed.