WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1964/97 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Import of frozen sparrows from China into the European Union
Date: 1997-06-09
Institutions: BLOCH VON BLOTTNITZ, European Parliament
Subjects: Belgium, China, EU law - national law, bird, competence of the Member States, deep-frozen product, import, originating product, protection of animals, transit

C 60/72

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25. 2. 98

(98/C 60/106)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1964/97

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

(9 June 1997)

Subject: Import of frozen sparrows from China into the European Union

On 28 January 1997 a customs officer at the port of Antwerp confiscated a container which was to be brought into
the Netherlands by lorry. The container held a total of 1 236 000 plucked and frozen sparrows with a value of
BFR  3  300  700.  Neither  trade  nor  imports  or  exports  of  tree  sparrows  (Passer  montanus)  are  permitted.
Nonetheless about 6 000 000 birds of this species are brought into the country each year. Belgium mostly acts as
a transit country and the main purchasers of the frozen birds are Italy, Spain and Portugal where these birds are
traded at high prices as a delicacy and placed on the menus of restaurants.

Is the Commission aware of the incident described above and the whole problem of imports of sparrows

1.
from China into the EU and in particular Belgium?

If so, what action has the Commission taken to date and what does it intend to do to halt this trade?

If not, what steps will it take to find out about the problem described above?

Does the Commission consider that the problem of the import of species which are protected in the EU has

2.
been adequately clarified by the case law of the European Court of Justice?

If so, what action does it consider incumbent on itself and the governments of the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 1997)

1.
The Commission was unaware of this matter, nor had it been approached on the problem raised by the
Honourable Member. In similar cases, however, when all is said and done frontier policing falls solely within the
powers of the national authorities as Community law now stands.

In a judgment handed down on 8 February 1996 (1) the European Court of Justice stated that Council
2. and 3.
Directive 99/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the protection of wild birds (2) applies to subspecies of birds that do not
naturally live in the wild state other than outside Community territory if the species to which they belong, or
other subspecies of that species, naturally live in the wild state on Member-State territory.

This  being  the  case  this  judgment  does  not  concern  direct  imports  from  non-member  countries  and,  to  the
Commission’s  knowledge,  the  Court  of  Justice  has  still  not  been  caused  to  hand  down  judgments  in  cases
involving this type of import.

Against this background it would also be appropriate to examine this body of problems in the light of the relevant
rules of international law that apply to trade.

(1)  Case C-202/94, Godefridus van der Feesten, 1996 Court Reports, p. I-355.
(2)  OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, Directive as last amended by Directive 94/24/EC of 8 June 1994 (OJ L 164, 30.6.1994).

(98/C 60/107)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1968/97

by Edith Mu¤ ller (V) to the Commission

(9 June 1997)

Subject: Cooperation between EU and UN

The European Union, and its Member States, spend a lot of money every year to cooperate with the UN. It is in
the citizens(cid:146) interest to know what we get for this money.