WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3095/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Danube expansion, Phase 2
Date: 1997-10-02
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: Bavaria, Germany, application of EU law, case-law (EU), infringement procedure (EU), protected area, protection of animal life, protection of plant life, watercourse













EUR-Lex - 91997E3095 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3095

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3095/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Danube expansion, Phase 2  


Official Journal C 134 , 30/04/1998 P. 0080 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3095/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (2 October 1997)Subject: Danube expansion, Phase 2As the Commission will know (see letter of 21 March 1997 from the Bavarian State Chancellor's office to Bürgerforum Umwelt; Federal Government reply No 11/86, 11/87 of 23 January 1997), neither the Free State of Bavaria nor the Federal Republic are prepared to fulfil their obligations under the EC bird protection directive and the flora and fauna directive and declare the water meadows eco-system between Straubin and Vilshofen a protected area. In their replies the Free State and the Republic note that declaration of the protected area has been deferred in favour of the current Danube expansion scheme, 'because a decision on the nature of the second expansion phase for this part of the Danube is not due to be taken before the year 2000'.This is illegal practice. Under ECJ jurisprudence it is not admissible to include economic considerations in decisions to declare special protected areas or determine their boundaries.The fact that official assessments by the regional office for environmental protection are not yet available is a matter which the Bavarian State Government must answer for. The assessments have not been commissioned because the Free State of Bavaria and the Federal Government are trying to circumvent the protected area declaration.1. Will the Commission require the Federal Republic, in accordance with Article 169 of the EC Treaty, to take the necessary measures within a time-limit laid down by the Commission?2. Will it apply for fines to be levied against the Federal Republic of Germany, in accordance with Article 171 of the EC Treaty, since both the Federal and the Land authorities are quite clearly disregarding their obligations under Articles 3 and 4 of the bird protection directive and in breach of the requirement to put forward proposals under the flora and fauna directive?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (11 November 1997)The Commission, as the Honourable Member states, is informed about this matter. This area, as well as other areas along the river Danube, is expressly highlighted in the context of infringement proceedings (92/4575) opened in 1994 concerning the insufficient designation in Germany of special protected areas according to Directive 79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. )) on the conservation of wild birds.1. According to the procedure provided by Article 169 of the EC Treaty, the Commission gave Germany the opportunity to submit its observations.2. A sanction according to Article 171 of the EC Treaty is foreseen only in a situation when a Member State has failed to comply with a judgement of the Court of justice. Such a judgement does not exist in this case at present.