ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/214

(2004/C 70 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3084/03

by Koldo Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso (NI) to the Commission

(20 October 2003)

Subject: Sit-in of Basque political prisoners

In the Basque Country, an unquestionable political conflict exists because the Basque people are being denied their democratic rights. The outlawing of ideas and political projects has brought only greater confrontation and more suffering.

The community of almost 700 hundred Basque political prisoners have been holding a sit-in, in the prisons of the Spanish Kingdom and the French Republic, since 27 September in defence of their rights. They have rejected visits from friends and relatives. As a matter of fact, journeys are so long that visits are impossible, and 13 people have already died on the way to or from the prisons.

The Spanish Government ignores every call to put an end to these sufferings, and the Spanish courts do not dare to insist on the democratic principle of the separation of powers.

On 4 September 2003, the European Parliament adopted a Report on the situation as regards fundamental rights in the EU (2002) (A5-0281/2003), where much emphasis is given to the mobilisation of European capacity to put an end to these intolerable abuses of prisoners.

Can the Commission table a proposal to the European Parliament so that this issue may be tackled as a matter of urgency?

Would the Commission support the involvement of Basque prisoners in a bid to find a solution to the ongoing conflict in the Basque Country?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2003)

The Commission takes the view that none of the powers conferred on it by the European Union and Community Treaties would allow it to take the action requested by the Honourable Member.
2.

The Geoplantour project was approved in accordance with the project selection procedures set out in Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for the period 1994-1999 and the procedure indicated in the call for proposals. Moreover, the text published in the Official Journal made it clear that the Commission reserved the right to propose amendments to the programme or strategy before a proposal regarded as innovative was definitively approved. The final date for the submission of proposals, laid down in the call for proposals (1), was 8 July 1996. The projects received were examined in depth by a committee of 12 independent experts on 23/24 September 1996, and then by an interdepartmental working party on regional planning on 22 October 1996. Fifteen pilot projects were selected. The financing decisions were signed with the lead partners of each project following a detailed consultation between the Commission and the local authorities responsible and their partners in the successful projects, in accordance with the call for proposals. The Bugewitz/Ducherow project was not originally selected, as it did not meet all the eligibility criteria (in particular, there was no transnational partnership). However, the Commission persuaded it to work with a Greek partner from one of the 15 successful projects. The original proposal was reworked on this basis by the new partnership. The project partnership, now dubbed Geoplantour, was expanded to regional level in Germany and its content was improved. During the negotiating period which preceded the final decision to grant funding, the Commission received complaints about the project from a consultant who had worked with the German partner. The Commission consulted the German authorities to clarify the situation before it took its final decision, which explains the late approval of the project at the end of 1997. The Commission finally granted funding under the TERRA programme to the municipality of Bugewitz/Amt Ducherow, as the local authority responsible for carrying out the project. It is not for the Commission to comment on the problems between the body responsible for the project and the consultant who had been involved in drafting the original proposal. The Commission closed the project at the beginning of 2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/261

(2004/C 70 E/281)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3374/03

by John Bowis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 November 2003)

Subject: Reclassification of hip, knee and shoulder joint replacements

Has the Commission assessed the scientific justification for its possible forthcoming proposal to reclassify hip, knee and shoulder replacement devices as Class III medical devices under Directive 93/42/EEC (1) (total joint replacements are currently classified as Class II b under this Directive), and, in particular, evidence that might link accidents with such replacement devices with their design? Has the Commission considered all available studies and the effects of a reclassification on costs, availability and innovation, and what conclusions has it drawn? In particular, is it aware of the three independent studies commissioned by Eucomed and completed in October?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2003)

The Commission, in cooperation with national authorities, has carefully examined the three studies forwarded by Eucomed. These are, as stated by Eucomed, independent studies that reflect the views of their authors, and not Eucomed itself.

In discussions with national authorities, an overwhelming majority emphasised that, in their experience, clinical data for total joint replacement was often lacking and that changes in design were frequently not sufficiently verified with regards to their long term effects. In their view, risks associated with recovery surgery should be minimised as much as possible.

As ever increasingly younger patients receive joint replacements, and in the view of National Authorities, only the strictest conformity assessment procedures should be followed.

Documents presented in the course of discussions do not suggest that stricter conformity assessment procedures have a negative impact for patients with respect to cost, availability or innovation.

(1) OJ L 169, 12.7.1993, p. 1.
—

on 2 August 2003 a policeman, Bui Quang Thuan, arrested Y-Tao Eban (b. 1979) in the village of Buon Kdun because he was accused of having fed Y-Jon Enuol, who had been hiding in the area. The policeman paid a number of Montagnards who work for the police (Y-Kren, b. 1945; Y-Dialm Eban, b. 1960; Y-Hoc Eban, b. 1952; Y-Jam Eban, b. 1958; Y-Sot Buon Ya, b. 1956; Y-Wik Nie, b. 1945; Y-Suai Enuol, b. 1945; Y-Hue Buon Ya, b. 1946) to beat up Y-Tao Eban. After being tortured the man was forced to sign a statement admitting that he had acquired a weapon to fight the Vietnamese regime;
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/329

(2004/C 88 E/0336)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0613/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(3 March 2003)

Subject: EU/Mozambique 1999-2003: cooperation, development, human rights, assistance, etc.

For the years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 and with regard to Mozambique, can the Commission provide information on the following: What programmes have been or are being undertaken by the EU with Mozambique? What are the funds allocated? What is the expected duration of the individual programmes? What results have been obtained by the programmes, and what assessment has been made of their success or otherwise? What particular developments have characterised each of the programmes?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/112

(2004/C 88 E/0117)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2743/03

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 2003)

Subject: Slovakia

Does the Commission agree that, where possible, frontier and customs officials should be able to speak the language of the neighbouring country whose border they are supervising? Is the Commission aware that Slovak border officials on the frontier with Austria refuse to speak German, or indeed any language other than Slovak or Russian?

In view of Slovakia's imminent accession to the EU, will the Commission encourage Slovakia, and indeed all Member States, to ensure that at least some frontier officials are able to converse in languages likely to be useful on the frontier concerned?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 2003)

The Commission agrees that, whenever possible, customs officials both in the Union and in the candidate countries should be able to communicate in the language of the neighbouring country whose border they are supervising. With reference to candidate countries, the Commission has been advising their Customs Administrations to provide language training to customs officials. However, the administrative and organisational aspects of the customs services do not fall within the Commission's competence and are fully within the national competence of the existing and future Member States.

As for the case mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not aware of any specific problem, neither as regards customs officials nor border guards. Indeed co-operation between Slovak and Austrian authorities at the border is considered as satisfactory. Concerning customs, it is also worth stressing that, as from the day of accession in 2004, all customs controls between the existing and future Member States will be abolished and customs offices at the future ‘internal’ border will have to be dismantled by that date. Consequently, there will be no more presence of customs officials between Slovakia and Austria, and Slovakia will only manage part of the future Union external border with Ukraine.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/82

(2004/C 84 E/0088)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3679/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Ecos-Ouverture II programme by the municipality of Pesaro

In its answer to question E-1111/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Pesaro had submitted projects and secured funding under the Ecos-Ouverture programme, the Commission stated that no funding had been granted by 1999.

Can the Commission say whether the municipality submitted any projects and obtained and used any funding in the subsequent budget years?

Has the Commission completed its examination of the final reports mentioned in its answers and, if so, can it supply any information on the outcome?

(1) OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004, p. 139.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/599

(2004/C 78 E/0633)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3585/03

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: The EUMC's shelved report on Muslim anti-Semitism

According to the ‘Financial Times’ and the Danish newspaper ‘Berlingske Tidende’ of 23 November 2003, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) in Vienna has shelved a 112-page report on anti-Semitism which the EUMC had itself commissioned from university research staff in Berlin.

The reason why the report is being shelved is said to be that it did not portray the political image sought by the EUMC. Indeed, it revealed that it is Muslim immigrants and pro-Palestinian groups who are behind most of the attacks on Jewish property and persons in Europe, and Beate Winkler, the EUMC's strongly pro-Muslim director, did not want this to come out.

Beate Winkler and her monitoring centre have systematically sought to portray an image of Europeans as racist irrespective of the fact that this image is a false one in all essentials. All Muslim communities in the EU — as in the rest of the world — are witnessing flagrant breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights. This primarily takes the form of wide-scale oppression of women with many Muslim communities in the EU implementing Sharia law in the form of discrimination against women in the matter of inheritance in breach of the legislation in the Member States; still worse, there are what are known as the ‘honour killings’ of women wanting their freedom and even the killing of women who have been the victims of rape. These grave matters have never been dealt with by the EUMC.

The EUMC has systematically portrayed a false image of who the racists are and who is infringing human rights in the EU. Now Beate Winkler also wants to conceal the anti-Semitism of Muslims.

What action does the Commission intend to take in order to halt the one-sided politicising activity of the EUMC and ensure truthful information about racist threats and human rights' infringements in the EU?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/93

(2004/C 84 E/0119)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3727/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update concerning the funds for the SAVE II programme for the municipality of Pisa

With reference to question E-0969/03 (1), in which the Commission was asked whether the municipality of Pisa (Italy) had submitted projects and obtained funds under the SAVE II programme, the Commission replied on 25 April 2003 to the effect that no proposal had been submitted.

Can the Commission state whether, since then and up to the present, it has received any SAVE II projects from that municipality?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 169.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/736

(2004/C 84 E/0830)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3471/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(21 November 2003)

Subject: Buildings in ‘Es Trenc-Salobrar de Campos’

The present Majorcan Regional Government (Conseil de Mallorca) and the Autonomous Government of the Balearic Islands (Govern de les liles Balears), having abandoned a scheme for building a polo ground and additional accommodation for 3 000 people right next to Es Trenc-Salobrar de Campos, have now decided to approve the building of a 300-bed thermal hospital and clinic within the Es Trenc-Salobrar de Campos special bird protection area and site of community interest (code no: ES0000037).

Has the Spanish Government consulted the Commission with regard to this scheme, in accordance with Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive?

Does the Commission believe that this building scheme within the special bird protection area and site of Community interest is compatible with the provisions of the Habitat Directive?

What steps, if appropriate, does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2004)

The Honourable Member expressed his concern regarding the project to build a thermal hospital and a clinic within the Specially Protected Area (SPA) Es Trenc-Salobrar in Baleares.

According to the information available, the Commission has not received any request from the Spanish authorities.

Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive (1) set out the circumstances within a project where negative effects on Natura 2000 sites may or may not be allowed.

Therefore, the Spanish authorities have firstly to carry out an environmental assessment and afterwards apply, if it is necessary, Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive.

To summarise, the Commission is not aware of this initiative. The Commission has not received any information from the Spanish government in relation to any project to build these facilities within the Natura 2000 site; therefore, the Commission will request the Spanish authorities to provide information in relation to the aforementioned project.

(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.
1.

Can the Commission confirm that in preparation for the implementation of the social participation programme BG 0102.06 in 2001 the EU's delegation in Sofia received 20- or 30-page proposals (project sheet) on the basis of which PHARE appropriations totalling EUR 966 000 would be paid out to assist 12 existing Roma cultural and information centres and to provide teaching in reading, writing and arithmetic for 4 500 Roma?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/732

(2004/C 84 E/0824)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3142/03

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

(17 October 2003)

Subject: Career movements of Directors-General

Could the Commission submit to the Parliament a full analysis of all career movements of Directors-General since 1999 including a full list of all people who have held that office for any part of that period, details about when they first became a Director-General, any subsequent positions in the institutions they have held, any reasons for excluding someone from the mobility policy, their ages and their anticipated retirement date?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/600

(2004/C 78 E/0635)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3607/03

by Olivier Duhamel (PSE) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Vienna Observatory

Does the Commission consider it acceptable for the EUMC, the European agency responsible for monitoring racism and xenophobia, to censor the publication of the report requested from the Centre for Research on Anti-Semitism at the Technical University of Berlin?

Does it share our view that it is not by concealing the appearance of new forms of anti-Semitism that we will help to combat them?

Is it aware of the risks that the EU may give the, albeit false, impression of being tolerant of anti-Semitism, on the pretext of not jeopardising young Palestinian supporters in the suburbs, who sometimes veer dangerously, or unconsciously, towards anti-Semitism?

Can it ask the Vienna Observatory not to hide behind this kind of cautious attitude, which provides grounds for accusations that it tolerates anti-Semitism? Can it advise the Vienna Observatory, and any other EU body, not to ask unnecessary questions when carrying out surveys, as these are always a delicate and sometimes imperfect matter, as we saw with the controversies following the publication of the Eurobarometer on threats to peace in the world?

We need a strong, clear and rapid reaction. The EU and its various representatives must not equivocate in their analysis of anti-Semitism or in the fight against it.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/631

(2004/C 78 E/0667)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3699/03

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Objective 1 areas in Connacht/Ulster (Ireland)

My Connacht/Ulster constituency at present comprises 8 Objective 1' counties. After the 2004 European elections, the constituency of Connacht/Ulster will be renamed and enlarged. One county will be added, which, at present, has Objective 1 in transition' status. This county is County Clare, at present in the Munster constituency.

Can the European Commission inform me if the enlarged constituency will then comprise 8 Objective 1 in transition' counties and can you also inform me of the proposed status of County Clare?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2004)

The regions eligible under Objective 1 of the Structural Funds, including the regions in transition, are those that were decided by the Commission on 1 July 1999 (1) in accordance with the procedure foreseen in Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) no. 1260/1999. This decision is unaffected by subsequent changes in administrative boundaries in the Member States. The eight counties of Cavan, Donegal, Galway, Leitrim, Mayo, Monaghan, Roscommon and Sligo remain eligible for Objective 1 until 31 December 2006 while Clare will remain eligible for Objective 1 in transition.

(1) 1999/502/CE.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/93

(2004/C 84 E/0118)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3726/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update concerning the funds for the SAVE II programme for the municipality of Pesaro

With reference to question E-0968/03 (1), in which the Commission was asked whether the municipality of Pesaro (Italy) had submitted projects and obtained funds under the SAVE II programme, the Commission replied on 25 April 2003 to the effect that no proposal had been submitted.

Can the Commission state whether, since then and up to the present, it has received any SAVE II projects from that municipality?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 169.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/84

(2004/C 88 E/0091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2392/03

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(21 July 2003)

Subject: Stoning of Semsiye Allak in the village of Yalim, Turkey

According to numerous reports in the international press, 35-year old Semsiye Allak was stoned in the Kurdish village of Yalim in Turkey by her family when she became pregnant after being raped by a married man. The woman died seven months after the stoning, alone and abandoned in hospital, while the man was killed on the spot by her relatives who took the law into their own hands.

This appalling deed is a further example of the tragic consequences of gender discrimination which derive from religious fanaticism and intolerance. The systematic violation of women's human rights through the imposition of violent and degrading punishments which often result in death calls for an immediate practical response. In present-day Turkey, which is on the way to negotiating its accession to the EU, political measures should be taken to eliminate crimes of ‘honour’.

Will the Commission exert pressure on the Turkish Government to adopt stringent legislation against crimes of honour and taking the law into one's own hands, and to bring those responsible to justice? Will the Commission also intervene to protect women's human rights and bring an end to the degrading treatment of women and the perpetuation of violence and discrimination against them?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2003)

The Commission is aware of international press reports concerning the events mentioned by the Honourable Member.

As a Candidate Country, Turkey has undertaken to comply with the Copenhagen political criteria. These criteria include the principle of gender equality as well as economic, social and cultural rights. This has been made further clear as a priority under the revised Accession Partnership for Turkey to guarantee ‘in law and in practice the full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by all individuals without discrimination and irrespective of language, race, colour, sex, political opinion, religion or belief in line with relevant international and European instruments’.

Already in its Regular Report published in 2002 (1), the Commission drew attention to the issue of honour killings and mentioned explicitly that in Turkey ‘honour killings qualify for reduced sentences, which may be further reduced if the accused is a minor’.

In the sixth package of political reforms adopted by the Turkish Parliament on 19 June 2003, some measures have been taken to address the question of ‘honour killings’. In particular, Article 453 of the penal code has been amended to increase the penalty for the killing of out-of-wedlock babies from four to eight years to six to ten years. Article 462, which foresaw a reduction of sentence in the case of honour killings, has been abrogated.

The Commission will continue to monitor the situation closely and in particular the implementation of these new provisions.

(1) COM(2002) 700 final.