WRITTEN QUESTION E-0426/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Kosovo detainees in Serbia.
Date: 2000-02-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Albania, Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro, common foreign and security policy, political prisoner

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/41

In 1991, the Commission established a European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods
(ECVAM), which is a unit of the Institute for Health & Consumer Protection of the Commission(cid:146)s Joint
Research Centre,
Italy. ECVAM(cid:146)s principal duty is to co-ordinate the validation of
advanced, non-animal test methods at Union level, that is, to establish their relevance and reliability for
their stated purposes.

located at Ispra,

In February 2000, the Commission proposed the inclusion of the first three validated in vitro methods into
Annex V of Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the classification, packaging and labelling
of dangerous substances (3). The Member States voted favourably.

These methods were validated as a part of ECVAM(cid:146)s work programme, in collaboration with laboratories
and other institutions in the Member States and the United States, and were endorsed as scientifically
validated by the ECVAM scientific advisory committee and accepted by the relevant Commission services.
It is anticipated that a further ten methods will be validated during the 5th Framework Programme (1999
(cid:129) 2002).

This is the first time ever that validated alternative methods have been included in Annex V. The
Commission attaches great importance to this work and is actively promoting the acceptance of these
methods into the OECD test guidelines programme, in order to secure their world-wide application.

(1) OJ L 117, 5.5.1987.
(2) OJ L 49, 29.2.1999.
(3) OJ 196, 16.8.1967.

(2001/C 26 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0426/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(17 February 2000)

Subject: Kosovo detainees in Serbia

On the occasion of a hunger strike (from 24 December 1999 to 6 January 2000) and a demonstration on
5 January 2000, both organised in Brussels by Kosovars from the Albanian World League to demand the
release of Kosovar detainees in Serbia, I was received on 5 January 2000 by an official on the staff of the
High-Ranking Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy and by the Portuguese Chairman-
ship of the European Union. Both bodies declared that they were prepared to arrange for the situation of
the Kosovar detainees to be placed on the agenda of the European Council of Ministers on 24-25 January.
A reading of the reports of proceedings indicates that this item was not discussed at the said Council.

I wish to ask the following questions:

1. How will the Council respond to the European Parliament resolution of 16 September 1999, in which
the Presidency is urged to hold direct talks with the Serbian government on releasing all political
prisoners?

2. When will the Council debate the situation of Kosovar Albanians detained in Serbia?

3.

4.

Is the Council prepared to table and support a resolution at the UN Security Council calling for the
release of Albanian detainees in Serbia? If not, why not?

Is the Council prepared to make the lifting of sanctions against Yugoslavia and Serbian participation in
implementing the Stability Pact for South-East Europe dependent on a solution to the problem of the
Albanian detainees? If not, why not?

Reply

(8 June 2000)

The Council has taken note of the resolution of the European Parliament of 16 September 1999 to which
the Honourable Member refers. In current circumstances the Council is not in a position to have direct

C 26 E/42

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.1.2001

contacts with the Serbian government, nor is it likely to have any influence with Serbia over the release of
political prisoners. However the Council fully shares the Honourable Member(cid:146)s concern over of the fate of
the Kosovar prisoners still held in Serbia. It supports all efforts by the international community, among
others the ICRC, to obtain the release of all political prisoners. The EU welcomes the releases already
obtained by ICRC.

At its meeting on 14 and 15 February, the Council agreed to maintain its overall policy framework of
applying maximum pressure on Mr Milosevic. Its decision to suspend the flight ban in the light of calls by
the opposition was therefore coupled with an extension of the visa restrictions currently in force and an
enhancement of the effectiveness of the existing financial sanctions. Any future decision by the Council on
the lifting of sanctions would depend on a number of factors, and could only be taken on the basis of an
assessment of the overall situation.

The Council took note of the appeal launched on 23 February by the Kosovo Transitional Council, urging
the international community, and the UN Security Council in particular, to put maximum pressure on the
Belgrade authorities to release all detainees from Kosovo held unlawfully in Yugoslav prisons. The Member
States of the European Union will certainly support any UN initiative to contribute to a solution of the
problem. In this context, the Council took good note of the proposed measure by the head of the UN
Interim Administration in Kosovo, Mr Kouchner at the UNSC to appoint a special representative who
would take this issue up with the Belgrade authorities.

The Honourable Member can remain assured that the Council will continue to consider progress in
democratic freedoms and respect for the rights of minorities, including the fate of the Kosovar detainees, as
one of the key elements for a change in sanctions policy targeting the Belgrade regime. The Council is
keeping the situation in the region, and EU policies towards the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, under
constant review.

(2001/C 26 E/055)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0436/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 February 2000)

Subject: The Commission(cid:146)s position regarding the United Kingdom(cid:146)s attempts to regionalise fisheries in

Community waters

The United Kingdom is consistently expressing its intention to regionalise fisheries in Community waters,
thereby seeking to break up the European fisheries area and to extend the exclusive fishing zone of the
State concerned from 12 to 24 miles. According to press reports, Mr Franz Fischler, member of the
Commission responsible for agriculture and fisheries, is considering endorsing this claim.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s official position on this serious issue?

Is the Commission prepared to support this claim made by the United Kingdom which could lead to the
destruction of
the European economic and
monetary area?

the Common Fisheries Policy and the disintegration of

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(10 April 2000)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the British government has not put forward
any proposals for the regionalization of the common fisheries policy (CFP) nor for the extension of the
current 12-mile limited access zone to 24 miles.

The above-mentioned ideas emerged during the consultation process on the CFP after 2002, organised by
the Commission in 1998-1999. A detailed document on the regionalization of the CFP was presented by
an English federation of fishermen(cid:146)s organisations. A resolution to create national exclusive zones of
24 miles was indeed adopted by the Parliament in February 1999.