ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1565/02

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(3 June 2002)

Subject: Syria

In his answer to Question P-0634/02(1), Mr Patten states, among other things, that it is the Commission's firm belief that a dialogue on human rights will be more effective when conducted in the framework of a binding Association Agreement. He also states the following: a future European Union-Syria Association Agreement will refer to human rights as an essential element in European Union-Syrian relations and it will be designed to foster common objectives expressed in the Barcelona Declaration(2), such as developing the rule of law and democracy, respect for human rights, free trade and sustainable development. The Commission will stress issues of reform in the MEDA cooperation programme.

Does the Commission consider that it can remain optimistic about the necessary democratisation of Syria in the light of what has emerged, following the accident which occurred on 24 March 2002 in Homs, regarding the close technical and military cooperation between the Syrian and Iraqi governments in building missiles with ranges of more than 500 km?

More generally, is the Commission not concerned at the fact that a country which is now a member of the UN Security Council, thanks notably to the key support provided by the EU and its Member States, can violate the UN resolutions on Iraq in such a shameless manner?

Lastly, will the Commission indicate how far it intends to go in its optimistic and positive policy vis-à-vis regimes which not only treat their own people in a totalitarian and repressive manner, but also constitute such an obvious threat to international security and stability that they appear at the top of the black lists of all international organisations?

(1) OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002, p. 69.

(2) Adopted at the Euro-Mediterranean Conference (27 and 28 November 1995).

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(11 July 2002)

The Commission is aware of press reports regarding an explosion at the end of April 2002, in a Syrian arms factory located near Homs. The same press reports quote Western intelligence services stating that the weapons complex in question was not a missile facility.

The Commission would like to suggest that the question regarding Syria's membership in the Security Council be redirected to the Council.

The Commission reiterates that a dialogue on human rights is an effective tool to work for the implementation of the objectives laid down in the Barcelona Declaration (adopted on 27 and 28 November 1995). In this respect the Commission would like to refer to the latest round of association negotiations with Syria where substantial progress was made on the political chapter; in that context, the Commission took the opportunity of again clarifying the Union's approach to human rights issues and the central role they play in the Association Agreement.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2311/02

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(25 July 2002)

Subject: EU measures against the EU-Student Vote project for the unauthorised use of the EU logo

On the website of the association which organised the online elections of the so-called European Student Council www.eusv.org the European Union is still included amongst the partners of the initiative, as indicated by the official flag and a link to the website www.europa.eu.int.

The President of the Commission has declared that the Commission has neither financed nor supported this initiative in any way and that the above-mentioned Council will not be considered representative of European students.

What measures does the Commission intend to take to protect itself from the casual and unauthorised use of the symbols and name of the Union?

Answer given by Mr. Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2002)

The criteria agreed upon between the Council of Europe and the Commission provide that the European emblem may be used by third parties only if it is not:

- likely to create confusion between the user and the Union or the Council of Europe;

- linked to aims or activities incompatible with the principles and objectives of the Union or the Council of Europe.

With regard to these criteria the Commission would not have any objection to the use of European emblem to make a link to the Europa Server (http://europa.eu.int/abc/symbols/emblem/graphics/graphics_en.htm).

The Commission, however, would like to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that the permission to use the European emblem implies no right of exclusive use. It does not permit the appropriation of the emblem, or of any similar trade mark of logo, whether by registration or by any other means.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2475/02

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(6 September 2002)

Subject: Law on aid and tenders in view of the devastating floods

In recent weeks, Austria, Germany and the Czech Republic have all been hit by unprecedented flooding.

Thousands of people have seen their homes wrecked and their livelihoods destroyed.

The damage caused by the floods runs into several billion euros.

In the face of this disaster, can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. In view of the current situation, to what extent will the Commission show flexibility with regard to the derogations provided for from Community legislation on aid and tenders in order to cushion the financial impact on the Member States affected?

2. Where does it see specific margins for manoeuvre in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2002)

As regards state aid, the EC Treaty contains a specific provision, Article 87(2)(b), which provides that aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences shall be compatible with the common market. No special provision or amendments are thus required to deal with this kind of situations. In the past, the Commission has accepted that for example, floods could be considered natural disasters. The Commission will follow the same approach in the present case. Once it has been established that there has been a natural disaster, up to 100 % of the material damage caused by the natural disaster can be compensated for. Obviously, the Commission will endeavour to have a very prompt decision.

Concerning agriculture and rural development, reference is made to the answer given by the Commission to the Honourable Member's written question P-2539/02(1).

In reference to public procurement, the procedure can be speeded up and in cases where Member States can demonstrate exceptional circumstances, it will be possible to derogate from the requirement to publish a contract notice in conformity with Community law on public procurement: in concrete terms, Member States can decide either to organise a so-called accelerated procedure, i.e. the publication of the tender in the Official Journal of the European Communities including reduced deadlines for replies, or to carry out a negotiated procedure without prior publication of a tender notice in those cases where conditions for such a procedure are fulfilled (i.e. the existence of an unforeseeable event, of an extreme urgency incompatible with the deadlines required by other procedures including the accelerated one and of a causal link between the unforeseeable event and the resulting extreme urgency).

(1) See page 183.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2203/02

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(22 July 2002)

Subject: Freedom of expression and the Internet

Following the publication on 25 October 2000 of a report in the Osservatore Romano the daily newspaper of the Roman Curia of an article on blasphemous websites, the Italian financial police, after about two years' investigations, has ordered the shutdown of five US-based Internet sites.

Does not the Council consider that these provisions are contrary to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by the international instruments concerning human rights, in particular Articles 6 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights? If so, what steps does it intend to take?

Reply

(16-19 December 2002)

Article 33 of the Treaty of European Union does not allow the Council to intervene in the maintenance of public order and security in the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1518/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 2002)

Subject: Bird protection area in the Umeälv delta

A bird protection area in the Umeälv delta in northern Sweden is to be incorporated into the EU's Natura 2000 network. There are differing views as to how big the protected area should be. At the same time, there are plans to construct a new railway line Botniabanan in the immediate vicinity of the new area. The Commission is reportedly examining whether the proposed rail route is compatible with the protected area.

Does the Commission consider that the proposed rail route is acceptable and falls outside the area which should be protected? If the Commission has not yet taken a decision on this matter, can it give a date by which a decision may be expected?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2002)

The Commission has received a request from the Swedish Government for an opinion pursuant of Article 6.4 of the Habitats Directive(1) as to the presence of overriding reasons of public interest justifying the construction of Botniabanan (Bothnia Railway) adjacent to Umeälvens Delta special protection area/site of Community interest (SPA/SCI). During the subsequent discussions and meetings with the Swedish Government the Commission has pointed out that there are several complaints about an insufficient designation of Umeälvens Delta SPA/SCI and that, before giving an opinion, the Commission would need the Swedish Government to explain the scientific basis for the boundaries of the area it has designated. The Commission has also requested that the Swedish Government provides the comprehensive dossier required to make its judgement of the case this includes detailed statements of environmental impact on the site concerned, treatment of alternatives and the reasons on which the case of overriding public interest is made. According to the information the Commission has received, the material is currently under preparation. The opinion can be given only after the Commission has received the material and assessed it.

(1) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2238/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(17 July 2002)

Subject: Killings in the DRC

A series of unlawful killings took place in mid-May 2002 in Kisangani, north-east Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It is estimated that 1 200 people died in this massacre, which was condemned by the UN Security Council. However, no measures have been taken to put pressure on this state to bring the perpetrators to justice. The crimes, which included summary executions of civilians, rape and pillaging, are reported to have been carried out by members of the Rwandese Patriotic Army and combatants loyal to the Goma-based faction of the Congolese Rally for Democracy (RCD-Goma). According to human rights organisations such as Amnesty International, the same groups carried out similar massacres in June 2000.

What is the Council's position on these arbitrary killings and horrendous abuses of international human rights law, and what measures, if any, have been taken by the Council to ensure that the perpetrators of these massacres are brought to justice? Is the Council taking measures to prevent such massacres in the future?

Reply

(16-19 December 2002)

Concerning the events that took place in Kisangani in mid-May 2002, the EU, in a declaration published on 23 May, has denounced the resurgence of violence in the areas occupied by the RCD-Goma, notably in Kisangani and the repression of the Congolese people by RCD-Goma members and Rwandan troops. The EU also recalled the obligations stemming from the successive UN Security Council resolutions on the demilitarisation of Kisangani.

The EU is, however, of the opinion that this kind of events can only be prevented on a permanent basis through the realisation of peace in the region of the Great Lakes. The EU has over the years worked towards that goal in many different ways, by giving financial assistance to the ongoing peace initiatives and through its Special Representative Aldo Ajello. The progress made in the Inter-Congolese Dialogue between the government of DRC, the different armed opposition groups, the unarmed opposition and other groups as well as the recent peace agreement concluded between the DRC and Rwanda have kindled a new hope that peace in the region might be within reach.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2398/02

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(5 August 2002)

Subject: Neuroscience

Does the Commission not think that a public debate over the ethical limits to new developments in neuroscience is long overdue? Would the Commission not agree that there is a case for the creation of an advisory body similar to the one that has been set up to advise on genetics issues to advise the Commission and others in the field of neuroscience? If not why not?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2002)

The Commission agrees that new developments in Neuroscience do raise ethical questions. The Commission has already taken steps to address these issues by funding research projects on the ethical aspects of brain research and by organising symposia at international scientific conferences such as the symposium Ethics of psychiatric genetics at the World Congress on Psychiatric Genetics, Brussels 8 to 12 October 2002.

The Commission specifically recognises the need for open dialogue on the ethical and social impact of new technologies in both the Science and Society Action Plan(1) and in its communication on Life sciences and biotechnology A strategy for Europe(2).

The launching of a public debate regarding the advances in Neuroscience and its ethical and social implications is currently being discussed with the European Group on Life Sciences. This high level group of scientists was established in April 2000 by the Member of the Commission responsible for Research with the objective of contributing to the organisation and animation of a Life Science Discussion Platform. The Commission is willing to investigate the possibility of organising a public debate on this topic.

Providing advice on the ethical aspects of new developments in Neuroscience is clearly in the remits of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. The Group is an independent, pluralist and multidisciplinary body with a wide range of expertise including science and medicine, informatics, law, philosophy and theology. Therefore, the Commission does not consider it necessary to create a new advisory body to give advice in the field of neuroscience.

(1) COM(2001) 714 final.

(2) OJ C 55, 2.3.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2385/02

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Council

(2 August 2002)

Subject: Echelon interception system

As the Council is undoubtedly aware, in 1998 the European Parliament instructed STOA and a temporary committee of inquiry to investigate the Echelon interception system. The committee published its report in July 2001.

Although there is no formal proof, in the light of the evidence and the consistent pattern of statements from American sources in particular, the existence of a global system of this kind, with the participation of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, under the UKUSA, agreement is no longer in doubt. The same applies to the use of Echelon, namely the fact that the system is indeed used to intercept private and commercial communications and not military communications.

Although the committee's work did not produce any evidence to show that the global interception system was used to distort the conditions of competition, the report does point out that, according to information gathered in the United States, 5 % of intelligence gathered via non-open sources is used as economic intelligence this intelligence surveillance could enable US industry to earn up to USD 7 billion in contracts.

In the lights of these facts, will the Council:

- take measures to make communications secure and detect any threat of interception?

- call on EU partners gradually to draw up European rules on information exchange between information services?

Reply

(19 December 2002)

1. As concerns the protection of telecommunication traffic data, the Council recalls the:

- Council Resolution of 17 January 1995 on the lawful interception of telecommunications(1),

- Convention of 29 May 2000 on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the Member States of the European Union(2) and the Protocol of 16 October 2001 to this Convention(3), and

- European Parliament and Council directive 2002/58/EC of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the telecommunications sector(4).

2. If further provisions are necessary, the Council will examine any initiative coming from the Commission or a Member State.

(1) OJ C 329, 4.11.1996, p. 1.

(2) OJ C 197, 12.7.2000, p. 1.

(3) OJ C 326, 21.11.2001, p. 2.

(4) OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2021/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(9 July 2002)

Subject: Seville summit

Bearing in mind the free movement of persons within the European Union enshrined in the Treaties, and the rights of citizens freely to express their opinions, including the right to demonstrate peacefully, specifically during European Council meetings, can the Commission answer the following questions:

- Do the events during the recent summit in Seville, when the Spanish police prevented hundreds of Portuguese citizens from entering the country, including delegations from the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP), Left Bloc (BE) and NGOs intending to travel to Seville to take part in the demonstration on 22 June, mean that only capital now enjoys unrestricted freedom of movement?

- Will application of the Schengen Agreement be suspended for all summits from now on, thereby calling into question the right to demonstrate freely at European Union level?

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-2146/02

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

(18 July 2002)

Subject: Liberia

With reference to Liberia, will the Commission say which projects were financed in 2000 under the EU budget?

Will the Commision specify the total amount of aid allocated during 2000 to all the initiatives relating to Liberia?

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 P-1664/02

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 June 2002)

Subject: Participants in the European Conventions

Could the Commission please detail which of the organisations and networks of organisations taking part in the Forum of the European Convention are funded or part-funded, directly or indirectly, by the Commission or other European Union institution?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2002)

The list of participants in the Forum is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

The answer to the Honourable Member's question concerning funding will require more detailed research within the Commission. A supplementary answer will be supplied.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3207/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(12 November 2002)

Subject: Nicotine sweets

A number of tobacco manufacturers, including British American Tobacco, have announced that they will shortly be marketing a peppermint containing as much nicotine as a cigarette. The manufacturers have developed the cigalett as a way of providing smokers, who face a growing number of smoking bans, with nicotine that they can use at any time and in any place.

What is the Commission's reaction to this new product?

Will the Commission ban the cigalett?

If not, will Commission warn the public about the addictive effects of this sweet?

What is the position with regard to the labelling of the cigalett?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2002)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.