WRITTEN QUESTION E-2401/99 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Priority of international law over an EU directive, and compliance with provisions of treaties concerning the Iron Rhine.
Date: 1999-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, Netherlands, international agreement, international law, intra-EU relations, national law, rail network

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/125

for verification is one of the alternatives already under consideration by some trade unionists. The fact that
trade union members themselves have an interest in knowing how many colleagues belong to their
organisation is widely recognised.

No proposal made by the Commission would (cid:145)violate(cid:146)
freedom of association or any civil right to
confidentiality. Allegations that any such proposal has been made are completely without foundation in
fact.

(2000/C 225 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2401/99

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Priority of international

law over an EU directive, and compliance with provisions of treaties

concerning the (cid:145)Iron Rhine(cid:146)

The increase in the budget for trans-European networks confirms their importance for the European
Union. Both the construction of new transport infrastructure and the modernisation of existing infra-
structure are eligible for co-financing. The question of the Iron Rhine is a matter which is particularly
deserving of the Council(cid:146)s attention in this respect. By virtue of Article 12 of the Belgium-Netherlands
Arbitration Treaty (19 April 1839) and the Belgium-Netherlands treaties of 5 November 1842 and
13 January 1873 deriving therefrom (the (cid:145)Iron Rhine Treaty(cid:146)), Belgium is entitled to a link via the Dutch
district of Sittard to the German frontier. This international right of transit assumed physical shape
between 1869 and 1879 with the construction of the first cross-border rail link in Europe. However, after
the two world wars the Iron Rhine between Antwerp and the Ruhr in Germany fell into disuse. The Dutch
authorities are currently using national legislation to put obstacles in the way of resuming this interna-
tional rail link.

Does the Council acknowledge that by virtue of Article 12 of the Belgium-Netherlands Arbitration
1.
Treaty (19 April 1839), and the Belgium-Netherlands treaties of 5 November 1842 ands 13 January 1873
deriving therefrom, Belgium is entitled to a link via the Dutch district of Sittard to the German frontier?

Is Dutch environmental

2.
legislation pursuant to the habitats directive subordinate to the above-
mentioned international agreements, given that one of the contracting parties to the Belgium-Netherlands
Arbitration Treaty (Russia) is not an EU Member State? (N.B.: The Treaty of Vienna explicitly stipulates that
international law takes precedence over national law.)

In the light of the answers to questions 1 and 2, will the Council call on the Dutch authorities to
3.
comply with their obligations under the treaties, particularly as completion of the Iron Rhine is covered by
the general principle of loyalty to the Community? If not, why not?

Reply

(28 February 2000)

The question raised by the Honourable Member is not within the Council(cid:146)s competence.

(2000/C 225 E/134)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2403/99

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Proposed EUR 2 million cutback of the Poseima programme

On 9 November the Commission submitted its fourth Letter of Amendment to the 2000 Budget to
Parliament, proposing to cut EUR 2 million from the Poseima programme, while proposing increases for
the Poseidom and Poseican programmes.