WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1722/97 by Ana PALACIO VALLELERSUNDI to the Council. Public access to Council documents
Date: 1997-05-22
Institutions: European Parliament, PALACIO VALLELERSUNDI
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EU competence, European Ombudsman, Treaty on European Union, access to EU information, dissemination of EU information

17. 3. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 82/15

Is it true that the Ombudsman(cid:146)s remit has been restricted in this way and, if so, what was the legal basis for the
Council(cid:146)s decision?

Joint answer
to Written Question E-1722/97 and E-1813/97

(28 October 1997)

The sphere of competence of the European Ombudsman is laid down in Article 138e of the Treaty establishing
the European Community (TEC). That Treaty is applicable to Title VI of the Treaty on European Union (TEU)
insofar as Article K.8 of the TEU so provides. However, Article 138e is not cited in the list of TEC provisions
made applicable to Title VI of the TEU.

The new Amsterdam Treaty lays down that the provisions referred to in Article 138e of the TEC are to apply to
provisions relating to the fields referred to in Title VI of the TEU.

By letters dated 26 March and 20 June 1997 the Council sent a detailed reply to the Ombudsman concerning
Mr Bunyan(cid:146)s complaints. The Honourable Members will receive directly a copy of the two letters sent by the
Council to the Ombudsman (1).

(1)  The explanations of vote given by members of the Council on the matter have been released to the public.

(98/C 82/21)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1746/97

by Hono·rio Novo (GUE/NGL) and Se·rgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) to the Council

Subject: Imports of textiles and clothing from Indonesia

(22 May 1997)

In the wake of the amendments to Regulation 3030/93 (1) adopted in January 1997 and ratified by the Council on
29  April  1997,  the  Commission  has  adopted  a  specific  regulation  intended  to  allow  additional  quantities  of
textiles products and clothing to be imported from Indonesia.

Does the Council believe that its decision of 29 April 1997 is compatible with Indonesia(cid:146)s failure to respect the
decisions of the UN, and with the positions of the European Parliament and the EU requiring trade relations with
Indonesia to be conditional on the East Timor issue?

(1)  OJ L 275, 8.11.1993, p. 1.

Answer

(28 October 1997)

Additional quantities of imports of certain textile products originating in Indonesia were granted by Commission
Regulation No 560/97 of 26 March 1997 (1), whose entry into force preceded the date of adoption of Regulation
(EC) No 824/97 (2) which amends Regulation (EC) No 3030/97 on common rules for imports of certain textile
products from third countries.

The  abovementioned  Regulation  (EC)  No  824/97  was  adopted  without  prejudice  to  the  European  Union(cid:146)s
position  on  the  political  questions  concerning  third  countries.  The  Regulation  falls  within  the  sphere  of
competence of the Commission, assisted by the Textiles Management Committee.

On 25 June 1996 the Council adopted a common position defining the European Union(cid:146)s policy towards East
Timor. The common position contains no trade sanction in respect of Indonesia

(1)  OJ L 85, 27.3.1997.
(2)  OJ L 119, 8.5.1997.