WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2685/97 by Sebastiano MUSUMECI to the Commission. Case of racism in Germany ignored by the authorities
Date: 1997-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSUMECI
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, Germany, action programme, crime against individuals, penalty, racism, xenophobia

16. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 117/45

(98/C 117/56)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2685/97

by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Case of racism in Germany ignored by the authorities

Further to Question E-1239/97 (1) on racism and the Commission(cid:146)s unsatisfactory answer,

1.  what representations has the Commission made to the German Government to condemn the specific act of

racism in question?

2.  why has it not yet asked the German authorities to take appropriate action, when the European Union claims

to promote the campaign against racism and xenophobia and the ideals relating thereto?

3.  what measures does it intend to take to ensure that its answer is not seen merely as a list of platitudes?

4.  with reference to the Council(cid:146)s joint action against racism, how does it intend to act whenever a Member

State fails to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms?

(1)  OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 244.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1997)

1. and 2.
in regard to a specific racist act.

As Community law stands at present the Commission cannot intercede with the national authorities

Specific measures to counter violence, racism, xenophobia and antisemitism are a matter for each Member State,
taking into account its constitutional rules and criminal law.

For its part the Commission attaches the greatest importance to the issue of racism, which runs counter to

3.
everything that Europe stands for. It deeply regrets any racist act in the Community.

The joint action against racism and xenophobia (1) adopted by the Council on 15 July 1996 is designed to
4.
ensure  effective  judicial  cooperation  between  the  Member  States,  despite  existing  differences  in  national
criminal law. Its implementation is a matter for the Member States and their authorities alone, and it is not for the
Commission, given the powers it possesses at present, to take initiatives in this area.

(1)  Common Action 96/443/IAI, OJ L 185, 24.7.1996.

(98/C 117/57)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2687/97

by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Legislation on telecommunications

The European telecommunications sector is currently preparing for full liberalization on 1 January 1998. I would
ask the Commission to give detailed answers to the following questions and to throw light on any obscure aspects
of legislation or the communication on access.

The tariffs for universal service were recently fixed in France. They seem to be on the high side and to form
1.
an obstacle to the development of a competitive telecommunications market. Does the Commission agree? If so,
what does it intend to do about it? If not, on what criteria does it base its conclusion?

2.
A  problem  for  the  telecommunications  sector  is  the  procedure  that  must  be  adopted  when  an  access
problem  is  encountered.  An  approach  can  be  made  to  the  national  regulatory  authority,  a  national  court,  the
national or European (DG 4) competition authority, the ONP committee and the national media authority (in the
case  of  cable  operators).  How  does  the  Commission  view  this  problem?  Has  it  had  consultations  with  the
Member States about competence problems arising between different authorities in the Member States? If so,
what is the outcome? How does the Commission intend to solve competence problems in the future?