WRITTEN QUESTION E-1482/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The case of the Commission official Paul van Buitenen.
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European official, administration of the Institutions, administrative procedure, administrative sanction, corruption, duties of civil servants, financial control, fraud, fraud against the EU, institutional reform, interinstitutional relations (EU), personnel administration

C 330 E/2

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

The Ministry of the National Economy has already sent a letter to KEDKE, the project(cid:146)s implementing
4.
agency, requesting the immediate completion of the project if it is to be funded through the 1994-1999
CSF or to ensure its completion through the agency(cid:146)s own resources. Should the project not be completed,
the Commission will recuperate the Community funds which had been allocated.

(2000/C 330 E/002)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1482/99

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: The case of the Commission official Paul van Buitenen

Mr Paul van Buitenen supplied the budgetary control authority with information concerning dysfunctions
and fraudulent activities within the Commission.

The Santer Commission punished him severely by suspending him from his duties, banning him from
entering Commission premises and reducing his salary by half. He was subsequently reinstated at the
Commission but was assigned to a less important post.

Does the new Commission agree that, pursuant to the Treaties, the European Parliament is a budget

1.
and budgetary control authority?

Does it not therefore think that the official in question acted in accordance with the Treaties by

2.
turning to the budgetary authority?

Does the Commission not think that Mr van Buitenen should be rewarded for demonstrating such a

3.
high sense of civic responsibility and bringing democracy to an institution such as the Commission?

4. What steps does the Commission intend to take so as to enable Mr van Buitenen to return to his
former post?

5. What action does the Commission intend to take so as to ensure that those who were Mr van
Buitenen(cid:146)s hierarchical superiors at the time he made his disclosure are at least transferred from their
current posts in which they have responsibility for financial control?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2000)

Parliament is one of the budgetary authorities of the European Communities and may grant or refuse

1.
the Commission a discharge for the budget.

2. and 3. Mr Paul van Buitenen was formally reprimanded because, without authorisation, he broke the
rules in force for officials of the European Communities by divulging documents outside the Commission
which related to cases that were under examination by the judicial authorities and also the subject of
disciplinary proceedings, thus compromising the principle of the presumption of innocence. In coming to
its decision, the employing authority took account of the fact that the information had been commu-
nicated to a Member of the European Parliament and recognised that a strict application of the relevant
rules might not be in accordance with the appropriate standard of openness. It was in the light of these
circumstances that the Commission imposed a formal reprimand which is the second most moderate
penalty for infringements of the Staff Regulations.

The Commission would draw the Honourable Member(cid:146)s attention to the fact that, in accordance with the
Commission Decision concerning investigations carried out by the Task Force on Coordination of the fight
against fraud of 14 July 1998, officials having knowledge of the existence of presumed irregularities were
obliged to inform their Directors-general or Head of service or, if they considered it useful, the Task Force
directly. Since the entry into force of Commission Decision 1999/396 concerning the terms and
conditions for internal investigations in relation to the prevention of fraud, corruption and any illegal

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/3

activity detrimental to the Communities(cid:146) interests (1), they shall inform their Heads of service or Directors-
general or, if they consider it useful, the Secretary-general of the Commission or OLAF directly. Officials
who provided or provide such information through those means had and have the guarantee that they
shall in no way suffer inequitable or discriminatory tretament as a result of providing it. In the context of
its administrative reforms, the Commission is in the process of developing an improved system which will
ensure that, in addition to present provisions, officials who fulfil their duty to report evidence of alleged
wrongdoing have further equitable and effective means for reporting, and obtaining thorough and active
response to, their concerns and evidence.

In compliance with provisions of the Staff Regulation, in the interests of the service, Mr van Buitenen
4.
was assigned to a different department where the duties correspond to his skills and background.
Reassignment in the interests of the service cannot in any way be regarded as a disciplinary measure.
The post which he now occupies is at least equivalent to the one which he occupied before.

5. When the documents were divulged in December 1998, Mr van Buitenen(cid:146)s superiors warned him
that he would be violating the Staff Regulations. Mr van Buitenen acted entirely on his own initiative and
the Commission does not accept that it would be justifiable for the officials who were his superiors at the
time, and acted in good faith, to be moved to other posts for advising him about the requirements of the
rules in force and the possible consequences of disclosing the documents in question outside the
Institution.

(1) OJ L 149, 16.6.1999.

(2000/C 330 E/003)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1890/99

by Pietro-Paolo Mennea (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Facilities to be built close to Castel del Monte

(14 October 1999)

The town Council of Andria in the province of Bari has approved a project which will involve the creation
of an area including facilities such as a ticket office, a book shop, a restaurant, various other services and a
car park in close proximity to the octagonal castle built for Frederic II of Swabia between 1240 and 1250
known as (cid:145)Castel del Monte(cid:146).

Its very definition as an artistic monument indicates that the castle and the hill on which it stands
constitute a single cultural asset, which Unesco has included on its list of world heritage sites.

It is quite clear that if the project is executed in its present form it will alter and cause unacceptable
damage to the integrity of this historic site and the surrounding landscape.

The project has benefited from EU funding, as it is one of the projects financed to develop and exploit
tourism in Objective 1 regions (multi-regional operational plan for the Italian Mezzogiorno).

Can the Commission say whether the project has been the subject of the required opinions from the
competent authorities, in particular the Bari Environmental, Architectural and Artistic Heritage Office and
the Ministry for Cultural Assets and Activities.

Whether it intends to take steps to block the funding earmarked by the European Union, in order to
ensure that the execution of the project is suspended in accordance with the relevant Italian conservation
law and the European legislation designed to cover such cases?

Can it also say whether it intends to make European funding subject to an appropriate modification of the
project, whereby the envisaged facilities and car park would be moved downhill in order to preserve the
local landscape and the beauty of this artistic and historic monument?