do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1621/97 by Eva KJER HANSEN to the Council. Minority rights
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, KJER HANSEN
Subjects: Roma, anti-discriminatory measure, fundamental rights, human rights, national minority, protection of minorities, racism, rights of minorities, schooling, xenophobia













EUR-Lex - 91997E1621 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1621

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1621/97 by Eva KJER HANSEN to the Council. Minority rights  


Official Journal C 082 , 17/03/1998 P. 0013 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1621/97 by Eva Kjer Hansen (ELDR) to the Council (14 May 1997)Subject: Minority rightsIs it reasonable that the Union requires more from the future Member States from Eastern Europe, when it comes to the protection of minority rights, when the Union has made no legislative effort in that field for the minority groups within the Union?Does the Council plan any legislative measures for the protection of minority groups in the Union?Answer (17 October 1997)The specific question to which the Honourable Member refers does not fall within Community competence.However, the Council recalls that Article F(2) of the Treaty on European Union states that the Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law.Furthermore, attention is drawn to the Resolution of the Council and the Ministers of Education, meeting within the Council, of 22 May 1989 on school provision for gypsy and travellers children ((OJ C 153, 21.6.1989, p.3. )), to the Joint Action of15 July 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning action to combat racism and xenophobia ((OJ L 185, 24.7.1996, p.5. )) and to the Council Regulation (EC) No 1035/97 of 2 June 1997 establishing a European monitoring centre on racism and xenphobia ((OJ L 151, 10.6.1997, p.1. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1632/97 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. American ban on investing in Burma
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, MAIJ-WEGGEN
Subjects: European Communities, Myanmar/Burma, United States, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, human rights, investment abroad, investment policy













EUR-Lex - 91997E1632 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1632

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1632/97 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. American ban on investing in Burma  


Official Journal C 021 , 22/01/1998 P. 0075 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1632/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (14 May 1997)Subject: American ban on investing in BurmaCan the Commission confirm that the American President has signed a law banning American businesses from investing in Burma because of the adverse situation regarding democracy and human rights in that country?How can the Commission prevent businesses in the US making their investments via European firms and European Member States?Would it not be appropriate, in the wake of the Union's lifting of the preferential system for Burma, for the Commission to submit a proposal as soon as possible for an end to investments on the part of the Union so that, together with the US, maximum pressure can be put on Burma?Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1997)On 22 April 1997, the United States (US) President announced his decision to impose a ban on new US investment in Burma, invoking the so-called Cohen-Feinstein amendment to the Appropriations Act for the fiscal year 1997.The new sanctions prohibit US persons from new investment in Burma. The details, including the definition of US persons and new investment, have been specified in an executive order published on 20 May 1997. The Commission is at present examining in depth the executive order to further analyse the potential impact of this decision.The withdrawal of privileges under the generalized scheme of privileges (GSP), on the other hand, is in no way linked to the sanctions imposed by the Community in its common position on Burma adopted on 28 October 1996 and prolonged for a second six -month period on 29 April 1997. The withdrawal of GSP privileges is exclusively based on the provisions of the Council Regulation (EC) No 3281/94 and 1256/96 ((OJ L 348, 31.12.1994. OJ L 160, 29.6.1996. )), Articles 9-12 and clearly not related to the common foreign and security policy (CFSP).The Commission is participating actively in CFSP work. The Commission is, however, not in a position to anticipate future developments with regard to the possible imposition of further sanctions on Burma, in particular since Member States are engaged in a discussion on the usefulness of economic sanctions to achieve political objectives.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1637/97 by Doeke EISMA to the Commission. Portugal's initiative on legalizing drugs
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: EISMA, European Parliament
Subjects: Portugal, competence of the Member States, drug addiction, international convention, liberalisation of the market, narcotic













EUR-Lex - 91997E1637 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1637

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1637/97 by Doeke EISMA to the Commission. Portugal's initiative on legalizing drugs  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0113 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1637/97 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Commission (14 May 1997)Subject: Portugal's initiative on legalizing drugsWith regard to Portugal's initiative for an international convention to legalise the use of drugs,1. Has the Commission taken note of this initiative?2. What is the Commission's view of this proposal? Does the Commission share the view that there is a need for an international convention legalizing the use of drugs?3. Can the Commission provide precise details of the proposals by President Sampaio of Portugal and the President of the Portuguese Parliament, Almeida Santos?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (30 June 1997)1. The Commission is not aware of any such initiative.2. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1112/96 ((OJ C 322, 28.10.1996. )) by Mr Fernandez Albor, which made it clear that the question of drugs legalisation is outside its competence.3. It is Commission policy not to comment on public statements by politicians in the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1622/97 by Eva KJER HANSEN to the Commission. Minority rights
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, KJER HANSEN
Subjects: legal basis, linguistic group, minority language, protection of minorities, regional language, rights of minorities













EUR-Lex - 91997E1622 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1622

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1622/97 by Eva KJER HANSEN to the Commission. Minority rights  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0111 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1622/97 by Eva Kjer Hansen (ELDR) to the Commission (14 May 1997)Subject: Minority rightsIs it reasonable that the Union requires more from the future Member States from Eastern Europe, when it comes to the protection of minority rights, when the Union has made no legislative effort in that field for the minority groups within the Union?Has the Commission any intentions to draw up the proper legal base for the only existing budget line (B3-1006) that gives financial support to minority languages in the Union in order to conserve its existence in the future? Has the Commission considered Article 128 as a legal base?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (4 July 1997)The Commission would like to confirm to the Honourable Member that in its 1997 work programme, it is stated that a proposal for a Decision establishing a multiannual programme for the protection of regional and minority languages and cultures will be presented to Parliament and the Council during the second half of 1997.The legal basis for this proposal will be determined in accordance with its contents and objective, and in line with the requirements established in the rulings of the Court of Justice.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1624/97 by Anthony WILSON to the Commission. Unidentified flying objects (UFOs)
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, WILSON
Subjects: air space, extra-atmospheric space, remote sensing, space navigation, space technology, space vehicle, use of outer space













EUR-Lex - 91997E1624 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1624

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1624/97 by Anthony WILSON to the Commission. Unidentified flying objects (UFOs)  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0151 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1624/97 by Anthony Wilson (PSE) to the Commission (14 May 1997)Subject: Unidentified flying objects (UFOs)Does the Commission acknowledge that 'the extraterrestrial hypothesis' is the most likely explanation for a number of reports of unidentified craft?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1624/97, E-1625/97 and E-1721/97 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1997)In the performance of its duties under the Treaties, the Commission does not acquire information of the kind requested. It is therefore unable to answer the question.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1641/97 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Safeguard inspections in the German nuclear power station at Unterweser
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: BLOCH VON BLOTTNITZ, European Parliament
Subjects: EAEC, Germany, International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear power station, nuclear safety

C 60/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25. 2. 98

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 1997)

The Commission has not received any substantive evidence of the criticism to which the Honourable Member
refers.

The criteria and procedures used for evaluating proposals and selecting projects under the specific research and
technological development (RDT) programmes are clearly set out in the information packages prepared by each
RTD programme and made available to potential proposers. These criteria are applied by the independent experts
who evaluate the proposals and provide advice to the Commission.

In the context of the discussions on the forthcoming fifth framework programme for research and technological
development, management issues, including selection procedures, are currently being examined with a view to
learning  from  best  practice  and  making  the  procedures  even  more  transparent.  Any  changed  management
procedures which result from these discussions will be subject to the fundamental principles which have always
governed the implementation of Community research programmes, namely equal access, equitable treatment,
excellence as a priority, efficiency and transparency of procedures.

A  total  of  195  Spanish  participants  (research  institutions,  universities  and  industries)  are  involved  in  the
360 research projects selected for funding so far, under the first four calls for proposals of the Agriculture and
fisheries specific RTD programme, FAIR, (1994-1998).

(98/C 60/58)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1641/97

by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(14 May 1997)

Subject: Safeguard inspections in the German nuclear power station at Unterweser

Internal  IAEA  reports  maintain  that  (a)  the  IAEA(cid:146)s  Euratom  authority  does  not  allow  any  inspections  in  the
German nuclear power station at Unterweser. They also note that there are (b) qualitative differences in respect of
the technical inspection options between the IAEA and Euratom, the options offered by the Euratom authority
being inferior to those of the IAEA.

Are these reports correct?

If so, on what grounds are access to and inspection of MOX fuel in the Unterweser nuclear power station being
refused?

If  so,  why  is  it  that  the  Euratom  authority(cid:146)s  inspection  options  are  inferior  and  why  is  the  best  possible
technology not being used?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 1997)

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that access was not denied but that the accurancy of
measurements is the issue. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her written
question E-1642/97 (1).

(1)  See page 33.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1634/97 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Ratification by Kenya of the Convention against Torture
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, MAIJ-WEGGEN
Subjects: EU control, Kenya, UN convention, cruel and degrading treatment, democracy, development policy, human rights, police, torture













EUR-Lex - 91997E1634 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1634

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1634/97 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Ratification by Kenya of the Convention against Torture  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0112 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1634/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (14 May 1997)Subject: Ratification by Kenya of the Convention against TortureCan the Commission confirm that Kenya has recently ratified the UN Convention against Torture?Is the Commission aware that NGOs are still reporting instances of torture by the Kenyan police?Is the Commission prepared to call, via its delegation, for the Convention to be incorporated into Kenyan legislation with effective means of monitoring?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1997)The Commission can confirm that Kenya became a signatory to the United Nations (UN) Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.The Commission, in close co-ordination with Member States, is actively pursuing all opportunities to emphasise to the Kenyan government the importance the Commission attaches to the close link between development policy and cooperation and the respect for fundamental human rights, the recognition and application of democratic principles, the consolidation of the rule of law and the strict abidance of good governance procedures.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1658/97 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. Report on drugs in Europe
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament, KAKLAMANIS
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Committee of the Regions, European Economic and Social Committee, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, European Parliament, committee report, drug addiction, exchange of information, narcotic













EUR-Lex - 91997E1658 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1658

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1658/97 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. Report on drugs in Europe  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0115 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1658/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (14 May 1997)Subject: Report on drugs in EuropeArticle 18 of Regulation 302/93 ((OJ L 36, 12.2.1993, p. 1. )) on the establishment of a European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction states that the Commission shall forward to the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers a progress report on the Centre's activities aimed at preventing the spread of drug abuse in the EU by 31 October 1996.Will the Commission say whether such a report has been drawn up, and if not, why not?Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1997)A report ((COM (97) 146. )) on the activities of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the period 1994-96 was indeed drawn up by the Commission and sent to the Council and the European Parliament, and, for information, to the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1636/97 by Doeke EISMA to the Council. Portugal's initiative on legalizing drugs
Date: 1997-05-14
Institutions: EISMA, European Parliament
Subjects: Portugal, drug addiction, international convention, legality, narcotic

C 82/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17. 3. 98

15 July 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, concerning
action  to  combat  racism  and  xenophobia  (2)  and  to  the  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 1035/97  of  2  June  1997
establishing a European monitoring centre on racism and xenphobia (3).

(1)  OJ C 153, 21.6.1989, p.3.
(2)  OJ L 185, 24.7.1996, p.5.
(3)  OJ L 151, 10.6.1997, p.1.

(98/C 82/18)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1636/97

by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) to the Council

(14 May 1997)

Subject: Portugal(cid:146)s initiative on legalizing drugs

With regard to Portugal(cid:146)s initiative for an international convention to legalise the use of drugs,

1.  Has the Council taken note of this initiative?

2.  What is the Council(cid:146)s view of this proposal? Does the Council share the view that there is a need for an

international convention legalizing the use of drugs?

3.  Can the Council provide precise details of the proposals by President Sampaio of Portugal and the President

of the Portuguese Parliament, Almeida Santos?

Answer

(16 October 1997)

The Council is not in possession of the alleged proposals of the Portuguese President and the President of the
Portuguese Parliament.

(98/C 82/19)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1722/97

by Ana Palacio Vallelersundi (PPE) to the Council

(22 May 1997)

Subject: Public access to Council documents

According to recent press reports, the Council has sent a reply to the Ombudsman in connection with an alleged
case  of  maladministration  reported  by  a  Mr  Bunyan,  a  journalist,  relating  to  the  application  of  Decision
93/371/EEC (1)  on  public  access  to  Council  documents.  The  Council  apparently  believes  that,  since  the
documents  in  question  pertain  purely  to  Title  VI  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union,  the  Ombudsman  has  no
powers to investigate the complaint. As this is a matter of interest to the European Parliament, could the Council
forward to me a copy of its reply to the Ombudsman?

(1)  OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 43, as last amended by Decision 96/705 (OJ L 325, 14.12.1996, p. 19).

(98/C 82/20)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1813/97

by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Council

(29 May 1997)

Subject: Ombudsman

The  Guardian  of  24  March  1997  reported  that  the  Council  of  Ministers  had  decided  that  the  European
Ombudsman should not deal with matters coming under the third pillar.