WRITTEN QUESTION E-0500/00 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Council. Member State violations of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and the consolidated Treaty establishing the European Community.
Date: 2000-02-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, Greece, Italy, Treaty of Amsterdam, free movement of persons, human rights, infringement of EU law, national, royalism

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/175

Given that the consultant(cid:146)s report is confidential, the Commission does not plan to send a copy to
Parliament. The Commission would emphasise that it is not in the least responsible for any views
expressed in the report. The Commission is continuing to examine the matter and has not yet taken a
decision. Parliament will be duly informed.

(1) OJ C 303 E, 24.10.2000, p. 179.

(2000/C 330 E/199)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0497/00

by Esko Sepp(cid:228)nen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Revision of the EWC Directive

The German parent company of Fujitsu Siemens Computers has closed its company in Finland for reasons
which are clearly not economic, in order to preserve jobs in Germany. In this connection the company
was clearly in breach of its consultation and information obligations under the EWC directive, and of its
obligation
responsible
(COM(1998) 612 fin. (1). Is it within the Commission(cid:146)s power to monitor compliance with this directive
and does it have plans to amend the directive to make it more binding?

decision-makers

the managers

decision with

discuss

and

its

to

(1) OJ C 2, 5.1.1999, p. 3.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2000)

The Commission does not have any information at its disposal which enables it to conclude that the
employee information and consultation obligations under Council Directive 94/45/EC of 22 September
1994 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings
and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (1)
have not been respected in the case referred to by the Honourable Member. In any event, as this Directive
has been properly incorporated into German law,
it is first and foremost the task of the national
authorities to assess any infringements of the rules in force which may be brought to their attention by
those who feel they have been wronged.

The Commission is currently looking at how this Directive has been implemented. Within the next few
weeks it will adopt a report to the European Parliament and Council on this subject.

The Commission has on several occasions emphasised the need for the proposal for a Council Directive
establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees to be adopted by Parliament and
the Council without delay. Clearly, the provisions contained in the proposal are not yet in force.

(1) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994.

(2000/C 330 E/200)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0500/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Council

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Member State violations of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and the

consolidated Treaty establishing the European Community

Is the Council aware that, as of this moment, more than one hundred and eighty Members of the European
Parliament have signed the following motion for a resolution:

Mindful of the provisions of Article 3 of Protocol No 4 to the Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950) as amended by Protocol No 11 (cid:145)requiring that

C 330 E/176

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

no one shall be expelled by means either of an individual or collective measure, from the territory of
the State of which he is a national(cid:146) and that (cid:145)no one shall be deprived of the right to enter the territory
of the State of which he is a national(cid:146), and mindful of the incorporation of those rights under Article 6
of the Common Provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the following undersigned Members of the
European Parliament call upon the Governments of Austria, Greece and Italy to honour their Treaty
commitments by restoring to the former royal houses of their respective countries full civil rights,
including the right to enter freely without let or hindrance their countries of origin, without any
further delay, and request that, where such rights have not been restored by 1 January 2000, the
European Court initiate proceedings against any offending State?

At all events, given that, under the terms of the Treaty, there is no basis for discrimination against
individual families, having regard to the provisions of Articles 39 and 43 of Title III of the Consolidated
Version of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, dealing respectively with the free movement
of persons, services and capital and the right of establishment, given that Prince Victor Emmanuel has not
been permitted to visit his homeland for 53 years or his son ever to set foot on Italian soil, and given that,
although the aforementioned rights are not conditional, Otto von Habsburg was required to sign away
fundamental civil rights before being allowed to settle in Austria, will the Council demonstrate its
commitment to upholding the European Treaties and to European law by urging its Members to refer
Austria, Greece and Italy without delay to the European Court of Justice?

Reply

(2 May 2000)

Under Article 226 of the TEC, it is for the Commission to bring matters before the Court of Justice if it
considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the TEC.

(2000/C 330 E/201)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0503/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(25 February 2000)

Subject: Reassignment of Council staff

What procedures does the Council have available, and how often are they implemented,
for the
reassignment of staff from one directorate-general which may need fewer staff to another directorate-
general which may need more staff? How effective have these measures been in terms of the number of
posts transferred each year between directorates-general as a percentage of total numbers in post? Can the
Council give any other information about its reassignment of staff?

Reply

(2 May 2000)

At the start of the 1980s the General Secretariat of the Council introduced a policy on in-house mobility
guided by the principle, recognised in the Staff Regulations, that any official should be able to (cid:145)apply for a
transfer within his institution(cid:146) (Article 7 (1)). This policy is based on the premise that it is not only in the
interest of the person applying for the transfer but also in the interest of the institution to give a person
who wants to be reassigned opportunities for mobility.

However, in response to the question put by the Honourable Member, the General Secretariat has not yet
established any particular internal procedures or rules for the reassignment or (cid:145)redeployment(cid:146) of staff
within its services and directorates-general. In practice, though, over the last few years there have been
several isolated instances where staff have been reassigned so as to bolster existing teams or set up new
ones, depending on the urgency and the importance of certain dossiers. This redeployment has been
carried out in compliance with the mobility procedure.
In particular, these were officials who were
assigned to the Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit (PPEWU) and to the co-decision legislative
procedure unit.