ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2029/02

by Carlos Lage (PSE) to the Council

(9 July 2002)

Subject: Free movement of persons in the Schengen zone

On 22 June a group of 500 Portuguese citizens travelling to Spain to take part in an authorised demonstration to be held in Seville during the European Council meeting was prevented in a violent manner from entering Spanish territory by members of the Spanish police forces. The incident occurred at the border town of Vila Verde do Ficalho, Alentejo, and involved repressive action on the part of the Spanish authorities, with Portuguese citizens being hit with batons and pushed and shoved (the victims included a Portuguese Member of Parliament), although they were only trying to find out why they were not allowed to cross the frontier. The Spanish police even entered the buses carrying the group and confiscated cameras and film. Nothing can justify this kind of behaviour and action, totally unacceptable in a Union which considers respect for fundamental freedoms and rights as one of its founding principles not even reasons of national security, such as those which allow each signatory of the Schengen Convention to implement Article 2 thereof and thereby re-establish control over the internal borders. It seems unlikely that the Portuguese citizens represented a particular danger, or indeed any danger, to the Spanish State. And, even if they had, the forceful and heavy-handed behaviour which, unfortunately, characterised the reaction of the Spanish police authorities, would have been quite unacceptable in Spain, Portugal or any other country in the Union.

Can the Council therefore say what measures it will take vis-à-vis the Spanish Government to clarify the facts?

Does it not consider that a clear definition and common agreement should be sought concerning the circumstances and conditions which may lead to the suspension of the rules governing Schengen?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2021/02, E-2028/02 and E-2029/02

(11 November 2002)

The Council informs the Honourable Parliamentarian that Article 2 paragraph 2 of the Schengen Implementing Convention of 1990(1) allows the Member States to reintroduce for a limited period at internal borders.

It will be for each of the Member States to ascertain whether and to what extent this possibility should be invoked in case they host a European Council. Decision SCH/Com-Ex (95) 20 Rev. 2(2) lays down rules on the procedure for applying article 2(2) of the Schengen Implementing Convention. Article 33 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 64 of the Treaty establishing the European Community stipulate that the taking of concrete measures with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security in a matter for which the Member State are responsible. It is therefore not for the Council to judge whether such measures have been taken appropriately.

(1) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000.

(2) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, p. 133.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1762/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 June 2002)

Subject: Promotion of hydrogen fuel derived from renewable energy sources and regional programmes

To progress a sustainable transport policy, which not only reduces city pollution and CO2 emissions, it is clearly necessary to support the use of alternative fuels, derived from renewable energy sources, through the regional / structural programmes of the EU. One promising fuel type is hydrogen, which also has the benefit of noise reduction when used in fuel cells. It can be derived from any form of electricity, as well as biomass, natural gas, and various chemical processes.

Is the Commission encouraging the use of hydrogen fuel as part of the EU's regional programmes, for example in funding public transport programmes? Given that the programmes emphasise renewable sources of energy for various reasons, does the Commission favour the use of hydrogen derived from renewable sources in the regional /structural programmes?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2002)

The Structural Funds' regional programmes may include measures to expand use of renewable energy sources. In the energy section of the guidelines for programmes in the period 2000 to 2006(1) the Commission discusses these sources and calls on Member States to use Community funding to develop them. The priorities centre on investment to promote use of renewable energy sources, investment aid to reduce emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and carbon dioxide (CO2), using energy audits and promoting efficient energy management in small and medium-sized entreprises as well as in towns and cities. In accordance with the subsidiarity principle, the national and regional managing authorities are responsible both for the selection of projects to be part-financed and for their implementation.

Use of hydrogen as a fuel represents a future alternative to hydrocarbons, particularly if the hydrogen comes from renewable energy sources. Currently the technologies for producing this fuel and the techniques for using it safely are still at the development stage, however. Considerable effort will be devoted to this under the Sixth Framework Programme for Research, and use of hydrogen could be promoted through pilot projects.

(1) Commission communication concerning the Structural Funds and their coordination with the Cohesion Fund guidelines for programmes in the period 2000 to 2006 (OJ C 267, 22.9.1999).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1948/02

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Restriction of movement

Is the Commission aware that EU citizens and Chinese passport holders who are members of the Falun Gong were denied entry into Iceland because of the impending visit of the Chinese President Jiang Zemin in early June (2002)?

This is the first time the country has banned members of any movement or international organisation from visiting Iceland.

What action will the Commission take to stop the violation of European and international laws and human rights? Will the Commission let its views be known to the Icelandic government?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2002)

Since March 2001, Iceland applies the Schengen acquis, according to which internal borders can be crossed in principle without any checks on persons being carried out.

However, Article 2(2) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement stipulates that Member States can reintroduce border checks for a limited period where public policy or national security so require. This is done under exceptional circumstances, as a preventive measure to avoid the risk that people take advantage of free movement in order to endanger the public order or the public security of a Member State, notably when a demonstration is planned to take place there.

Iceland informed the Commission and the other Member States before reintroducing border checks that they would be carried out for the period between 7 and 16 June 2002 in relation to the official visit of the Chinese President, Mr. Jiang Zemin.

It should be born in mind that, according to the Treaty, the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security are incumbent upon Member States. The Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to rule on measures or decisions taken to reintroduce border checks for those reasons. Therefore, the role of the Commission in relation to decisions reintroducing border checks is limited.

As far as the restriction of the right of free movement of European citizens is concerned, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its joint answer to the written questions P-1975/02 by Mrs Figueiredo and P-1987/02 by Mr Lage(1).

In general, the rights of persons to freely express their opinion and to assemble peacefully are reflected in the European Convention on Human Rights and in the Union Charter of Fundamental Rights. Persons must be able to enjoy these rights without a threat to their security, to other people's security or to property. Member States are sometimes faced with the fact that people abuse these rights by taking advantage of legitimate public demonstrations to carry out acts of violence.

The Commission recalls that the primary responsibility for the maintenance of law and order lies with the Member States.

(1) See page 124.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1418/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 May 2002)

Subject: Use of languages in report on undeclared labour in Europe

On 26 February 2002 the Commission published a report on undeclared labour in Europe. It has been placed on the official website, Europa, only in English, with brief summaries in German and French.

Why did the Commission opt for these three languages?

Will it have the report translated into all the official languages of the Union?

Will the Commission in future ensure that the documents which it disseminates via the official European website are translated into the 11 official languages of the Union?

Does the Commission still consider it vital, as it has previously observed, that citizens of the Union should be able to read the texts adopted at Union level in their own language (see http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/role_nl.htm

5)?

Does the Commission agree that this limited choice of languages constitutes a violation of Article 21, Chapter III, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2002)

The publication of documents adopted by the Commission is foreseen in the eleven official languages of the Union. This is notably the case for COM documents, which contain the Commission's legislative proposals, and other communications of general interest that are due to be transmitted to the other institutions.

This principle is also applied for electronic publication: official documents of the Commission published on the Europa web-site are provided in the eleven official languages.

The report Undeclared labour in Europe. Towards an integrated approach of combating undeclared labour does not constitute a document adopted by the Commission, but is a final report of an external study containing specialised information.

Thus, it has been published on the Europa website in its original language (English), together with a brief summary in French and German.

It is, therefore, not the intention of the Commission to translate the report, which numbers 158 pages in total, into the other official languages.

The Commission certainly considers it to be of the utmost importance to ensure that citizens of the Union should be able to read the texts adopted at Union level in their own language and, as stated above, this it strives to do. However, it is not possible to translate reports of external studies such as the report in question. The publication of this report is a tangible proof of the Commission's commitment to be transparent and to make information public, including reports of external studies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1124/02

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Promeuro

Could the Commission please indicate how much money it has devoted to, and from which budget line it funds, the organisation Promeuro? Could it also please list the amounts for each of the past five years?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2002)

In reply to the question of the Honourable Member, hereby the overview of the Commission's contributions to Promeuro's projects over the last five years. They were financed on budget lines B3-306 and A 3021 respectively.

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1877/02

by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 June 2002)

Subject: Ghana

With respect to Ghana, can the Commission specify the projects funded from the EU budget in 2000? Can it state the total amounts granted in aid over 2000 under all the headings referring to that country?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1867/02, E-1868/02, E-1869/02, E-1870/02,E-1871/02, E-1872/02, E-1873/02, E-1874/02, E-1875/02, E-1876/02, E-1877/02, E-1878/02,E-1879/02, E-1880/02, E-1881/02, E-1882/02, E-1883/02, E-1884/02, E-1908/02, E-1909/02,E-1996/02, E-1997/02, E-1998/02, E-1999/02, E-2000/02, E-2001/02, E-2002/02, E-2003/02,E-2004/02, E-2005/02, E-2006/02, E-2007/02, E-2008/02, E-2009/02, E-2134/02, E-2135/02,E-2136/02, E-2137/02, E-2138/02, E-2139/02, E-2140/02, E-2141/02, E-2142/02, E-2143/02,E-2144/02, E-2145/02, E-2146/02, E-2147/02, E-2148/02, E-2149/02, E-2150/02, E-2151/02,E-2152/02, E-2153/02, E-2154/02 and E-2155/02given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2002)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.

It should be noted that the figures contained in the summary table by country are also to be found in the Financial Tables portion of the Annual Report on the Implementation of the EC's External Assistance.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2391/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(2 August 2002)

Subject: European funding for Belgium and the city of Antwerp

The Commission subsidises through its various funds many laudable projects in the EU Member States. Can it state how many EU subsidies Belgium receives and what the exact amounts of subsidy are for the cities of Ghent and Antwerp?

Can the Commission state the precise amount of subsidies paid in 1999, 2000 and 2001 to Belgium?

Can the Commission state the precise amount of subsidies paid in 1999, 2000 and 2001 to projects in the city of Antwerp?

Can the Commission state the precise amount of subsidies paid in 1999, 2000 and 2001 to projects in the city of Ghent?

What type of subsidies have been granted in Antwerp?

What type of subsidies have been granted in Ghent?

Supplementary answergiven by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 2002)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1829/02

by Pere Esteve (ELDR) to the Council

(27 June 2002)

Subject: Persons missing in unknown circumstances

In response to the current problem of persons missing in unknown circumstances, it seems that a collective working group of six Member State countries has been formed with the objective of creating an international database for identifying missing persons and unidentified corpses.

Is the Council aware of this working group and, if so, of what it involves?

Is the Council involved in this type of initiative, or does it intend to put forward a proposal for a similar initiative at European Union level?

Reply

(11 November 2002)

1. As part of the implementation of the Joint Action 97/154/JHA of 24 February 1997 concerning action to combat trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children(1), the Council adopted, on 19 March 1998, conclusions on missing persons and unidentified corpses.

It proposed that:

(a) either national coordination points be set up in the Member States, or the working methods and procedures of existing coordination points be improved;

(b) the handling at national level of reports of missing persons be improved, with priority being given to high-risk categories of missing persons;

(c) experience with these priority improvements be assessed within a year.

2. In evaluating the measures taken regarding missing persons and unidentified corpses the Council is examining ways to reach agreement on recommendations to improve the work of the national coordination points and took note of the initiative of the Netherlands delegation to organise an experts meeting on missing persons.

3. The report prepared by the experts has been presented to the competent Council Working Party. This report contains a suggestion for the creation of a database for the exchange of information on missing persons.

4. The need to the creation of a new database requires further examination in the light of the possibilities already offered by databases established in the Schengen Information System, by Europol and Interpol.

(1) OJ L 63, 4.3.1997, p. 2.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2651/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(20 September 2002)

Subject: GSM blocking systems

I should like to thank Mr Liikanen for his reply to my question E-2197/02(1). However, I should also appreciate some more information.

What are the results of the study which the Commission is currently performing into GSM blocking systems?

Does the Commission have any information about the use of GSM blocking systems in EU Member States?

If so, what action is the Commission taking against them?

Will the Commission draft a European directive on GSM blocking systems?

(1) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 207.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2002)

From the research done by the Commission it shows that Member States currently do not allow the jamming of GSM signals. Although France has adopted a law paving the way for jamming, there are as yet no implementing technical regulations, which would allow jammers to be legally used. The Commission, after consultation of Member States, published guidance on this matter on: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/rtte/jammers.htm.

The Commission is aware that jammers are currently marketed, mainly over the internet. These products are illegal and therefore Member States need to take action against them under the provisions of either Council Directive 89/336/EEC of 3 May 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility(1) or Directive 1999/5/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity(2) and remove such devices from the market.

As indicated in its response to written question P-2753/02 by Mme Caullery(3), the Commission considers that jamming is not a proper solution to deal with inappropriate use of mobile phones. Hence the Commission does not intend to make legislative proposals which would legalise jammers.

France is currently conducting studies on this matter in preparation of national technical regulation (see http://www.art-telecom.fr/communiques/communiques/index-030502.htm). The Commission will evaluate the draft of such a regulation once it will be notified.

(1) OJ L 139, 23.5.1989.

(2) OJ L 91, 7.4.1999.

(3) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 210.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2060/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 July 2002)

Subject: Imprisonment in Tibet

Does the Commission have any information about the Tibetan nun Ngawang Sangdrol who was imprisoned as a young teenage girl ten years ago after unfurling a Tibetan flag at a peaceful demonstration and calling for Tibet to be freed from Chinese control? In particular, does it have any information about her treatment in prison and the treatment of others imprisoned under similar circumstances? Is there any access given to the Red Cross or any other international agency?

Does the Commission regard the development of the European Union's relationship with China as vital to the future wellbeing of the international community, and, if so, has it impressed on China the damage which such policies are doing to China's image and interests abroad and the importance of moving towards a more relaxed stance vis-à-vis Tibet, the issue of religious freedom and the Falun Gong?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(2 August 2002)

The EU and the Commission have repeatedly emphasised to China the need for China to respect cultural and linguistic rights, religious freedom and the protection of minorities throughout China. The Commission has also asked China to start a direct dialogue between the Beijing authorities and the Dalai Lama as it believes strongly that resolution of the Tibetan situation can best be achieved through this.

The Commission has raised the case of Ngawang Sangdrol with the Chinese authorities in the framework of the bilateral EU-China human rights dialogue. Unfortunately although the Chinese authorities have provided information concerning her sentencing and imprisonment, they have not yet provided a satisfactory reply concerning her present treatment.

The Commission will continue to raise the case of Ngawang Sangdrol at every suitable opportunity, including at the highest level.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0201/02

by Carlos Ripoll y Martínez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 February 2002)

Subject: Use of official languages in information on Commission programmes

Those consulting the information made available by the Commission to Internet users at the site www.europa.eu.int will notice that for certain Community programmes, such as Comenius, Grundvig, Tempus, Learning and others, information is only provided in English, while for other programmes such as Leonardo the information exists only in English, French and German.

This failure to include all the official languages of the EU is a form of discrimination affecting every citizen and is also a breach of the right of unrestricted access to information.

Why has information about these programmes not been made available in all the official languages of the EU?

When will this information be provided for all EU citizens in the eleven official languages?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2002)

The purpose of Europa is to provide information for all interested parties about the programmes run by the Commission on behalf of the Union. The Commission is, however, well aware of the problems connected with the present level of multilingualism on a number of the sites run by its departments.

The fundamental reason why the information about these programmes is not yet available in all the official languages of the Union is the amount of resources currently available to Commission departments for the translation of information into all the official languages and to the webmasters for the physical management of thousands of translated files.

The problem will be partly solved when the Commission introduces the use of web content management tools capable of automating, to a large extent, the handling of thousands of new pages and links in up to eleven language versions. The Commission will experiment with such tools at the end of 2002 and, if they are successful, introduce them as soon as possible. In the meantime, the Commission estimates that there are currently 150 000 pages that need to be translated in order to catch up with the present backlog. It considers that this operation should be undertaken over a three-year period in order not to overburden translation capacities. Similar scenarios are now being examined for the future Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2000/02

by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 July 2002)

Subject: Mozambique

With respect to Mozambique, can the Commission specify the projects funded from the EU budget in 2000?

Can it state the total amounts granted in aid over 2000 under all the headings referring to that country?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1867/02, E-1868/02, E-1869/02, E-1870/02,E-1871/02, E-1872/02, E-1873/02, E-1874/02, E-1875/02, E-1876/02, E-1877/02, E-1878/02,E-1879/02, E-1880/02, E-1881/02, E-1882/02, E-1883/02, E-1884/02, E-1908/02, E-1909/02,E-1996/02, E-1997/02, E-1998/02, E-1999/02, E-2000/02, E-2001/02, E-2002/02, E-2003/02,E-2004/02, E-2005/02, E-2006/02, E-2007/02, E-2008/02, E-2009/02, E-2134/02, E-2135/02,E-2136/02, E-2137/02, E-2138/02, E-2139/02, E-2140/02, E-2141/02, E-2142/02, E-2143/02,E-2144/02, E-2145/02, E-2146/02, E-2147/02, E-2148/02, E-2149/02, E-2150/02, E-2151/02,E-2152/02, E-2153/02, E-2154/02 and E-2155/02given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2002)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.

It should be noted that the figures contained in the summary table by country are also to be found in the Financial Tables portion of the Annual Report on the Implementation of the EC's External Assistance.