WRITTEN QUESTION P-0842/01

by José Pomés Ruiz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: Complaint No 2000/421 SG(2000) A/15164/3

On 2 December 1998, two Spanish lorries carrying 250 pigs each the property of the livestock firm Biurrum S.L., were on their way to the Caso slaughterhouse in Malveira (Portugal) when they were intercepted at Aguas de Moura by a group of thirty or forty individuals, some of them masked, carrying fire arms or other weapons. The lorries were seized and then pushed, fully loaded, down an embankment, causing the loss of all the livestock and the destruction of the vehicles.

In the wake of a lengthy procedure which initiated over two years ago, and which has still produced no results despite Portuguese Government repudiation of the events, what measures has the Commission taken in view of Complaint No 2000/4241 SG(2000) A/15164/3 lodged on 17 November 2000 against the Portuguese Republic, for violation of Community law in respect of the freedom of movement of goods?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 April 2001)

The Commission has examined Complaint No 2000/4241 concerning the violence committed by private individuals on 2 December 1998, which caused substantial damage to vehicles transporting live animals and the loss of a large number of animals, as well as the difficulties encountered in obtaining compensation for the damage incurred.

In line with the condemnation expressed by the Portuguese authorities themselves, the Commission wishes to stress that it has always condemned violence by private individuals against the principle of free movement of goods.

Failure on the part of the responsible authorities of the Member State concerned to take the law and order measures necessary to put an end to a situation of this kind has already led the Commission to initiate infringement proceedings, and the Court of Justice to rule in its judgment of 9 December 1997 in Case C-265/95 Commission v. France that by failing to adopt all necessary and proportionate measures in order to prevent the free movement of fruit and vegetables from being obstructed by actions by private individuals, the French Government has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 30 (now Article 28), in conjunction with Article 5 (now Article 10), of the Treaty and under the common organisations of the markets in agricultural products (ECR I-6959).

In the case in point, it seems however that the considerations which led the Court of Justice to the finding that France had not taken all necessary and proportionate measures, such as the length of time during which the incidents occurred and their frequency, are not easily applicable to an isolated and unforeseeable incident such as the interception of the two lorries belonging to Biurrun L.S..

In these circumstances, the case law of the Court of Justice by which it recognised that the principle of the liability of the Member State for damage caused to private individuals by breaches of Community law which are ascribable to it is inherent in the Treaty system (see judgment of 19 November 1991, Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90, Francovich, ECR I-5357 and judgment of 5 March 1996, Joined Cases C-46/93 and C-48/93, Brasserie du Pêcheur and Factortame III, ECR I-1029) appears difficult to apply to the situation evoked in Complaint No 2000/4241.

The facts alluded to in Complaint No 2000/4241 date back to 1998, and the Commission is not aware of a repetition of such incidents which would tend to show laxness on the part of the Portuguese authorities in implementing proportionate measures to prevent private individuals from committing acts which impede the free movement of goods. Nevertheless, the Commission has asked the Portuguese authorities what steps they have taken to deal in the future with this type of situation, taking account in particular of the obligations incumbent on them under Council Regulation (EC) No 2679/98 of 7 December 1998 on the functioning of the internal market in relation to the free movement of goods among the Member States(1).

(1) OJ L 337, 12.12.1998.