WRITTEN QUESTION E-1593/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(5 June 2002)

Subject: Carriers' liability

Further to my questions on carriers' liability (E-0488/02 0493/02)(1) and the Commission's reply of 4 April 2002, could the Commission comment on the following point:

Is the Commission aware that in many airports around the world the task of checking in passengers is often done by the personnel of the country's national airline and not by the staff of the airline which is sanctioned if it carries insufficiently-documented passengers?

(1) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 45.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1587/02, E-1588/02,E-1589/02, E-1590/02, E-1591/02, E-1592/02, E-1593/02 and E-1594/02given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(9 July 2002)

All eight questions posed by the Honourable Member relate directly to the issue of carriers' liability and should therefore be answered jointly.

On the general issues raised by the Honourable Member:

It should be recalled that the Commission has given an exhaustive overview of its position and activities concerning carriers' liability in its written answer of 4 April 2002 to six written questions (E-488/02 to E-493/02(1) submitted by the Honourable Member. Reference is made to the content of this answer.

On the additional detailed points raised by the Honourable Member:

- Question E-1587/02: in the currently ongoing trilateral experts' meetings, which are being organised by the Commission as a direct follow-up to the Round Table on Carriers' Liability of 30 November 2001, the Commission aims to facilitate an open and constructive dialogue of all interested parties on specific issues related to carriers' liability. The question raised by the Honourable Member will undoubtedly be subject to discussion in these experts' meetings. The Commission notes that there are diverging interpretations and opinions on the relationship between the 1951 Geneva Convention provisions and the issue of means of access to other states' territories by persons who seek to leave their own country for asylum related reasons. This divergence has not yet been solved at international level.

- Question E-1588/02: as already stressed in its above-mentioned answer, the Commission feels it is necessary to find a balance between the legitimate aim of preventing and fighting illegal immigration and the need to avoid excessive burdens on industry. The very specific issue raised by the Honourable Member will undoubtedly be subject to discussion in the experts' meetings mentioned above.

- Question E-1589/02: the Commission has taken note of the judgement delivered by the British High Court on 5 December 2001 in the case Roth International GmbH et al. v Home Office. The Commission notes that this judgement is still under appeal.

- Question E-1590/02: contrary to what the Honourable Member suggests in his question, the Commission has never called for fully harmonised carriers' liability legislation applied to all means of transport. In the above-mentioned answer of 4 April 2002, the Commission stated that, for the moment, the issue of carriers' liability is not yet fully harmonised at European level and concluded that it is necessary to reflect on possible ways forward at European level. The ground for this reflection process is currently being laid within the above-mentioned round table process on carriers' liability and the Commission does not consider it appropriate to express concrete and detailed views at the present time on how possible future European legislation might look.

- Question E-1591/02: the Commission takes note of the clarification provided by the Honourable Member.

- Question E-1592/02: the issue raised by the Honourable Member will undoubtedly be subject to discussion in the experts' meetings mentioned above.

- Question E-1593/02: the Commission is aware of the fact raised by the Honourable Member.

- Question E-1594/02: the Commission does not consider it appropriate to express at the present time concrete and detailed views on how possible future European legislation might look.

(1) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 45.