P6_TA(2004)0047
Naval sonars
European Parliament resolution on the environmental effects of high-intensity active naval sonars
The European Parliament ,
— having regard to Article 6 and Article 174 of the EC Treaty,
— having regard to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos),
— having regard to the Biodiversity Convention,
— having regard to the provisions of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats Directive) (1),
— having regard to the International Whaling Convention of 1946,
— having regard to its Resolution of 19 June 2003 on the Commission communication “Towards a stra-
tegy to protect and conserve the marine environment ”(2),
— having regard to the Commission statements concerning Written Questions E-2442/01 and E-2797/02
and Oral Question O-0096/02,
— having regard to the petition on high-intensity active sonars submitted to the Committee on Petitions
(0611/2003) in June 2003,
— having regard to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CSM),
— having regard to Rule 108(5) of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas scientific and public concerns are increasing after a series of documented mass mortalities of
cetaceans (in Greece, 1996; in the US Virgin Islands, 1998,1999; in the Canary Islands, 1985, 1986,1989, 2002; in the Bahamas, 2000; in Madeira, 2000; and on the north-west coast of the UnitedStates, 2003) associated with the use of high-intensity mid-frequency active sonars in coastal environ-ments,
B. whereas a growing body of research, including evidence published by 18 European scientists in “Nature ”
(9 October 2003), confirm that the very loud sounds produced by high-intensity active naval sonarspose a significant threat to marine mammals, fish and other ocean wildlife,
C. whereas these sonars may have a negative impact on commercial fishing and the already depleted fish
stocks throughout the world's oceans, as also evidenced by a study commissioned by the UK DefenceResearch Agency (FRRI 27/94),
D. whereas Articles 204-206 of Unclos require States to assess the potential impact of their activities on
the marine environment and communicate the results of such assessments,
E. whereas Resolution 1998-6 of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) identified anthropogenic
noise as a priority topic for investigation within its Scientific Committee, and whereas the IWC Scienti-fic Committee, in its report to the 56th meeting of the IWC (July 2004), concluded that there is nowcompelling evidence implicating military sonars as having a direct impact on whales, in particular on
beaked whales; whereas the Scientific Committee also agreed that evidence of increased sounds from
other sources, including ships and seismic activities, was cause for serious concern,
(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(2) Texts Adopted, P5_TA (2003)0295.C 174 E/186 MT 14.7.2005 Il-Ġurnal Uffi ċjali ta' l-Unjoni Ewropea
Il-Ħamis, 28 ta' Ottubru 2004
F. whereas underwater noise is a form of pollution of the marine environment covered by Unclos and
Article 194 of Unclos stipulates that “States shall take all measures that are necessary to prevent, reduce
and control pollution of the marine environment from any source ”,
G. whereas the EU is committed to halting biodiversity loss in the EU by the year 2010, under Decision
No 1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 July 2002 (1) laying down the
Sixth Community Environmental Action Programme, and globally, under the Convention on BiologicalDiversity and the Plan of Implementation adopted at the World Summit on Sustainable Development,
H. whereas, with a view to effective compliance with these obligations, the nature of the risks involved
requires that the precautionary approach, as enshrined in the EC Treaty, be applied, i.e. if scientific
doubts exist, action which might harm biodiversity and wildlife must be avoided,
I. whereas, in its abovementioned resolution of 19 June 2003 Parliament considered that the lack of a
complete information base must not be used as a pretext to prevent appropriate precautionary action,in particular where there is clear evidence of a significant decline in biodiversity,
J. whereas, in the same resolution, Parliament called on the Commission to bring forward, as soon as
possible, a thematic strategy on the marine environment, based on the following elements:
— the“precautionary principle ”, including the evaluation of the long-term effects of policies and actions,
in line with Article 6 of the Treaty;
— the concept of sustainability, including establishing benchmarks for protection and conservation objec-
tives as well as action targets;
— a Strategic Environmental Assessment, in order to integrate environmental and biodiversity considera-
tions into mainstream decision-making;
— an integrated approach to addressing threats caused by all human activities affecting the marine envi-
ronment and a careful assessment of their impact on this environment and the mutual influence anddependency of such impacts;
— an integrated approach to coastal and offshore marine management;
— a regional approach taking into account regional differences in ecological characteristics, threats and
socio-economic aspects;
— strategic marine spatial planning for regional seas covering the whole of the EU continental shelf, which
would incorporate a plan-led approach into sectoral decision-making systems,
K. whereas the CSM notes, in relation to several cetacean species, that mass strandings after military sonar
tests are a matter for concern and should be further investigated,
1. Calls on the European Union and its Member States to adopt a moratorium on the deployment of
high-intensity active naval sonars until a global assessment of their cumulative environmental impact onmarine mammals, fish and other marine life has been completed;
2. Calls on the Member States to actively pursue, in the framework of NATO and other international
organisations, the adoption of moratoriums and restrictions on the use of high-intensity active sonars innaval operations and the development of alternative technologies;
3. Calls on the Member States to immediately restrict the use of high-intensity active naval sonars in
waters falling under their jurisdiction;
(1) OJ L 242, 10.9.2002, p. 1.14.7.2005 MT C 174 E/187 Il-Ġurnal Uffi ċjali ta' l-Unjoni Ewropea
Il-Ħamis, 28 ta' Ottubru 2004
4. Calls on the Member States to monitor and investigate in a transparent manner mass strandings and
deaths of marine mammals in EU waters which are associated with the use of intense anthropogenic noiseand to communicate the findings to the Commission;
5. Calls on the European Commission to conduct a study of the potential impact on the marine envi-
ronment of the deployment of high-intensity active naval sonars and to provide an assessment, on the basis
of information from the Member States, of the impact of current practices in European waters;
6. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to set up a Multinational Task Force to develop
international agreements regulating noise levels in the world's oceans, with a view to regulating and limitingthe adverse impact of anthropogenic sonars on marine mammals and fish;
7. Considers that any measures to introduce common standards and cooperation in the defence industry
field must exclude and actively seek alternatives to technologies which are likely to cause unnecessary andserious damage to the environment and other Community interests, such as, in this case, fisheries;
8. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.
P6_TA(2004)0048
Cluster munitions
European Parliament resolution on cluster munitions
The European Parliament ,
— having regard to its resolutions of 13 February 2003 on the harmful effects of unexploded ordnance
(landmines and cluster submunitions) and depleted uranium ammunition (1), of 13 December 2001 on
cluster bombs (2) and of 6 September 2001 on measures to promote a commitment by non-State actors
to a total ban on anti-personnel landmines (3),
— having regard to Protocol V of 28 November 2003 on Explosive Remnants of War to the UN Conven-
tion on Certain Conventional Weapons,
— having regard to the Ottawa Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and
Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction of 1997,
— having regard to the Cluster Munition Coalition formed by 115 NGOs from 47 countries on
13 November 2003,
— having regard to Rule 115(5) of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas “explosive remnants of war ”(ERW) refers to unexploded ordnance (explosive ordnance that has
been primed, fused, armed or otherwise prepared for use and used in an armed conflict and shouldhave exploded but failed to do so) and abandoned explosive ordnance; whereas anti-personnel landmi-nes (APL) are mines primarily designed to be exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of aperson and are banned under the Ottawa Convention,
B. reaffirming the need to strengthen international humanitarian law (IHL) as it applies to cluster muni-
tions and for new protocols restricting the use of cluster munitions and anti-vehicle mines to be esta-blished by the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) under the Convention on Certain ConventionalWeapons (CCW),
C. whereas the term “cluster munitions ”refers to weapons systems that are both dropped from the air and
launched from the ground,
(1) OJ C 43 E, 19.2.2004, p. 361.
(2) OJ C 177 E, 25.7.2002, p. 309.
(3) OJ C 72 E, 21.3.2002, p. 352.C 174 E/188 MT 14.7.2005 Il-Ġurnal Uffi ċjali ta' l-Unjoni Ewropea
Il-Ħamis, 28 ta' Ottubru 2004