MrAyadihadbeensimilarlyill-treatedon9January2003whenheleftforParis.Suchill-treatmentforms
partofalongcatalogueofattackscarriedoutbytheTunisianauthoritiesonTunisianjudgesandlawyers.
WhatistheCommission’sopinionofthesystematicusebytheTunisianauthoritiesofvariousformsof
intimidationagainstTunisianjudgesandlawyers?WhatmeasureshastheCommissiontaken,orwillittake, to persuade the Tunisian authorities to cease such practices? More generally, what is the
Commission’sviewofthedeteriorationinthehumanrightssituationinTunisia?
AnswergivenbyMrPattenonbehalfoftheCommission
(3March2003)
TheCommissionhasbeeninformedbyboththeEuro-Mediterranean HumanRightsNetworkandthe
NationalCouncilofFreedomsinTunisia(CNLT)ofthecircumstancessurroundingMrAyadi’strips.Thisinformationmatchesotherfactsreportedbythesamesources,concerningintrusionsattributedtotheTunisianpoliceintotheofficesofprominentmembersoftheTunisianBarandthephysicalintimidationofthesesamelawyers.
TunisianbordercontrolisofcoursestrictlytheresponsibilityoftheTunisianauthorities.However,should
thesecontrolsimpingeoncivilliberties,itwouldbeamatterforArticle2oftheEU-TunisiaAssociation
AgreementandtheCommissioncouldraisetheissueintherelevantpartnershipfora,afterdiscussionwith
theMemberStates.
Inthecaseinpoint,becausethereportedincidentsarepartofageneraldownwardtrendinthehuman
rightssituation,theEUintendstoremindtheTunisianauthoritiesoftheirobligationsandthecommitmentoftheMemberStatestothesefundamentalrightsandprinciples.TheEUwillchoosetheappropriatetimeandplacetoexpressitsconcerns.
(2004/C58E/017) WRITTENQUESTIONE-0393/03
byGlynFord(PSE)totheCommission
(13February2003)
Subject:Foreignsalescorporationlaws
IstheCommissionawareofpotentialjoblossesthatcouldbecausedbyEUretaliatorymeasuresagainst
theUSintheframeworkoftheforeignsalescorporationlawsdispute?Assomeoftheproductspotentiallylistedforhightariffsareproducedinthesouth-westofEngland,joblossescouldresultinanObjective2areaadjacenttoanareawithObjective1status,andthereforeoneofthepoorestregionsinthecountry.
AnswergivenbyMrLamyonbehalfoftheCommission
(24March2003)
The Honourable Member raises his concern on the negative effect that any eventual imposition of
sanctionsonAmericanproductswouldhaveonbusinessesestablishedintheSouthWestofEngland.
Inthatrespect,itwouldbeusefultorecallthecircumstancesrelatingtotheWorldTradeOrganisation
(WTO)incompatibleForeignSalesCorporation/ExtraterritorialIncome(FSC/ETI)legislationwhichprovidesan illegal export tax subsidy to American firms to the tune of roughly USD4000 million per year.Inparticular,followingtheCommunity’ssuccessfulchallengeoftheFSC/ETIlegislationbeforetheWTO,on30August2002theCommunitywasgrantedbytheWTOtherighttoimposecountermeasuresintheC58E/16 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
formoftariffsonimportsofcertaingoodsfromtheUnitedStatesuptothatamount.However,theUnited
Stateshasnotyettakenconcretestepstowardscompliance,althoughboththeAdministrationandseniormembersofCongresshaveindicatedthatthisistheirintention.
At the same time it must be made clear that the Commission’s objective in this dispute is not the
impositionofcountermeasuresonAmericanproductsbuttoobtainthewithdrawalofillegalmeasuresthatadverselyaffecttheinterestsofCommunitycompanies.TheCommission’saimis,therefore,toensurethattheUnitedStatescomplieswiththeWTOrulingonFSCwithintheshortesttimepossible.ButiftheUnitedStatesfailstocomply,theCommunitywillhavenootheroptionthantoexerciseitsWTOrights.
Inanattempt,however,tominimisethenegativeconsequencesthatanyeventualcountermeasurescould
createforEuropeanindustry,theCommissionhaslaunchedapublicconsultationexerciseonadraftlistof
productssoastogiveeconomicoperatorstheopportunitytoexpresstheirviewsonthelist;furthermoretheCommissionhasonlyinsertedonthelistproductsforwhichimportsfromtheUnitedStatesrepresenta maximum 20% of total imports into the Community. The Commission is now in the process ofevaluatingcommentsreceivedfrominterestedpartiesduringthepublicconsultationperiod.Incarryingoutthisanalysis,theCommissionaimstofurtherminimisethenegativeconsequencesthatanyeventualsanctionscouldcreatetoCommunityinterestswhichisafterallthestatedobjectiveofthewholeexercise.AfinaldecisiononthiswillbetakenfollowingconsultationoftheMemberStatesduringthefirstquarterof2003.
AsregardsthespecificsituationdescribedbytheHonourableMember(wherehesays‘assomeofthe
productspotentiallylistedforhightariffsareproducedinthesouth-westofEngland,joblossescouldresult’),hightariffsoncertainproductsfavour,notdamage,import-competingdomesticproducersandthusdonotharmtheirpersonnel.
(2004/C58E/018) WRITTENQUESTIONP-0415/03
byRogerHelmer(PPE-DE)totheCommission
(11February2003)
Subject:VATonfoodintheUKandIreland
WouldtheCommissionconfirmordenyareportthatappearedintheUK’sSundayTelegraph(25January
2003)thattheUKandIrelandwillbeforcedtolevyVATonfoodifMalta’saccessiontotheEUis
approved,inthatMalta’saccessiontermstotheEUsaythatMaltashouldlevyVATonfoodby2010,bywhichtimenootherEUcountrywouldhavethisexemption?
AnswergivenbyMrBolkesteinonbehalfoftheCommission
(17March2003)
ThelengthofMalta’stransitionalarrangementsundertheAccessionTreatyisnotlinkedtothetransitional
periodreferredtoinArticle28loftheSixthVATDirective(
1).Duringthisperiod,IrelandandtheUnited
Kingdomareentitledtocontinuetoapplyzero-rates.Asaresult,thesezero-ratesmayonlybeabolishedbyaunilateraldecisionoftheseMemberStatesorbyanewdirectiveadoptedbyaunanimousdecisionoftheEU’sCouncilofMinistersunderArticle93oftheECTreaty.
(1) SixthCouncilDirective 77/388/EECof17May1977ontheharmonisationofthelawsoftheMemberStates
relating to turnover taxes /dash Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, OJ L 145,
13.6.1977.6.3.2004EN C58E/17 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion