WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3462/96 by Georg JARZEMBOWSKI to the Commission. Differences in the implementation of import rules hit Union citizens
Date: 1996-11-29
Institutions: European Parliament, JARZEMBOWSKI
Subjects: Netherlands, airport, approximation of laws, customs duties, customs regulations, floriculture, import, import licence, protected species, protection of plant life













EUR-Lex - 91996E3462 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E3462

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3462/96 by Georg JARZEMBOWSKI to the Commission. Differences in the implementation of import rules hit Union citizens  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0130 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-3462/96 by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE) to the Commission (29 November 1996)Subject: Differences in the implementation of import rules hit Union citizensIn September 1996, a German citizen of the Union travelling from Bangkok to Hamburg via Amsterdam airport - with a connecting flight to Hamburg - flew into the European Union. He was carrying a number of plants for his scientific collection. If the plants had been cleared through customs at a German airport, the German customs authorities would have checked that they could be imported under the Washington Convention on species protection and, if so, released them. At Amsterdam airport, however, he was told that there was blanket ban on the import of orchids into the Netherlands, the orchids were confiscated and proceedings brought against him (see Confiscation Certificate No 01915 of 22 September 1996 issued by the Schiphol Airport Customs Office and the letter of 10 October 1996, reference number 1.5.1.2.96.30.5380). A lot could also be said about the way in which the Netherlands customs officials treated this Union citizen, who knew nothing about the Netherlands' implementation of the import rules.1. Now that the European internal market has been completed, is it not high time to harmonize the remaining different national import rules and their implementation, and if so, when and how can we expect this to be done?2. Until then, should Union citizens not also be informed of the existing differences?3. What will the European Commission do to ensure that the Union citizen affected in the present case, Professor H.-H E., gets the confiscated orchids back from the Netherlands authorities and that the customs authorities take no further action against him but rather apologize to him?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 December 1996)Under Council Regulation (EEC) no 3626/82 ((OJ L 384, 31.12.1982. )) imports of orchids require either a permit or - in the case of species listed in Appendix II to the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora - a certificate. The latter system is in particular used by Germany.1. The Council on 9 December 1996 adopted a comprehensive new regulation that does not provide for the above option, but will subject all imports of species concerned to an import permit, entering into force on 1 June 1997.2. Yes, the Commission will, together with the World wild fund for nature and Traffic Europe, launch an extensive information campaign at the time of adoption of the new regulation. The current Regulation has been in force since 1 January 1984 and its provisions are well known to all professionally involved in imports and exports of wild fauna and flora.3. The Commission is not in a position to take the proposed action, given that the Dutch authorities dealt with this particular import in compliance with Community legislation.