WRITTEN QUESTION P-0770/00 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Judicial cooperation with regard to paedophilia.
Date: 2000-03-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: child protection, extradition, help for victims, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, paedophilia, trafficking in human beings

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/3

Over half of

these delays are due to air traffic control,

for which each country bears sole
2.
responsibility in Europe. What practical action does the Council intend to take to bring about the urgently
needed harmonisation of the fragmented nature of the European control system under the umbrella of a
single administration? (British Airways and Deutsche Lufthansa, among others, have called on their
respective transport ministers to take such action.)

3. When will the Council of Transport Ministers consider the Commission(cid:146)s proposals on the EU(cid:146)s
accession to Eurocontrol, the intergovernmental European air traffic control organisation that operates on
the basis of consensus, and what timetable is envisaged for achieving this accession?

4.
Are there any plans to create for the control of European airspace within the EU a new structure
empowered to issue uniform and binding regulations, rather than having the EU join Eurocontrol? If so,
what form will this new structure take, and what powers will it have?

Reply

(29 September 2000)

In its Resolution of 19 July 1999 (1), the Council had the opportunity to point out that delays in air traffic
affect the efficiency of air transport in the Community, which causes serious problems for passengers and
could increase pressure on the environment. In particular, the Council invited the Commission to submit a
communication on recent and ongoing measures aimed at reducing air traffic delays and congestion in
Europe so as to enable the Council to evaluate the impact of such measures and decide, if necessary, on
new initiatives to be taken.

At the beginning of December 1999 and in response to this invitation, the Commission presented a
communication on (cid:145)the creation of the single European sky(cid:146). At its meeting on 9 and 10 December 1999,
the Council welcomed the action to be taken following this communication and took note of the setting
up by the Commission of a high level group to examine all relevant issues. The Commission, at the
Transport Council on 28 March 2000, presented some preliminary information on the proceedings of the
high level group. The Council received an interim report from the chairman of that group at the beginning
of June, and the Commission has stated its intention of working on the presentation of the final report
in October 2000.

Concerning the accession of the Community to Eurocontrol (European Organisation for the Safety of Air
Navigation) and considering the role of this organisation in the field of air traffic management in Europe,
the Council invited Member States to make every effort to reach a positive conclusion to the ongoing
negotiations. These negotiations are at a very advanced stage.

Furthermore, the setting up an European Aviation Safety Authority is currently under study. The main
objective is to achieve a high uniform level of safety in Europe by the formulation, approval and uniform
application of all necessary aviation safety regulations and by promoting them throughout the world. Such
an Authority would have to deal with the facilitation of free and fair competition in Europe and the
mutual recognition and equal treatment of aeronautical products, parts and equipment and of bodies and
persons concerned with the design, manufacture, maintenance and operation of products on the condi-
tions and in accordance with a time schedule to be established upon the creation of the new Authority.

(1) OJ C 222, 4.8.1999, p. 1.

(2001/C 81 E/004)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0770/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2000)

Subject: Judicial cooperation with regard to paedophilia

The introduction in the Treaty of Maastricht of a policy of cooperation in the field of justice and home
affairs was an important step in the process of European integration.

C 81 E/4

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

It is indeed hard to understand how in a Europe with total freedom of movement and establishment justice
should continue to be subject to strict frontiers,

Unfortunately, this new pillar of European policy has overlooked international crime in the sphere of
sexual abuse and trafficking in children and women, which is clearly growing.

The questioner feels that this is the kind of organised crime which most seriously undermines the
democratic society in which we live.

A recent case involving a Belgian national (Frans de Ryck) and Portuguese children from the Autonomous
Region of Madeira demonstrated the pitfalls created by the lack of cooperation in the field of justice as far
as this kind of situation is concerned.

Belgium refused to extradite the accused to Portugal, since the Portuguese State, via the Public Prosecutor(cid:146)s
Office, refused the victims any legal aid.

As reported in the press (DiÆrio de Not(cid:237)cias), only efforts made privately by the Portuguese Victim Support
Association and assistance from a Portuguese legal firm managed to solve the problem. In the meantime
the accused has appealed against the decision and the victims do not know what the outcome of the
appeal will be.

In view of this, can the Commission say whether it intends to take any steps to improve protection for
victims of this kind of crime when they cross national borders?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 2000)

The Commission considers that the Community has taken a number of initiatives and has developed a
policy in fighting against trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children,
including a
central focus on the assistance to victims of these types of criminal offences. The Commission has
previously delivered answers to the Parliament on these initiatives and this policy (see e.g. reply to Written
Question E-2797/99 by Mr Matikainen-Kallstr(cid:246)m (1) and reply to Oral Question H-0140/00 by Mrs Kratsa
during question time at Parliament(cid:146)s March 2000 session (2)). Therefore the Commission will not go into
detail on that part of the question. It wishes however to underline that the Tampere conclusions identified
the fight against trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children as a high priority matter.
This is also why the Commission has included this issue in the scoreboard designed to review progress on
the creation of an area of (cid:145)Freedom, Security and Justice(cid:146).

The refusal to extradite mentioned by the Honourable Member may have been due to the fact that the
person claimed was a national of the requested Member State. Refusal of extradition for this reason is
allowed under Article 6 of the 1957 Council of Europe Extradition Convention, which still forms the
backbone of extradition relations between the Union Member States. The 1996 Community Extradition
Convention in its Article 7 foresees that extradition may not be refused on the ground that the person
claimed is a national of the requested Member State. However, Member States may declare that they will
not comply with this requirement. Such a declaration has to be renewed every five years, otherwise it
expires. In any event, the 1996 Community Extradition Convention has not entered into force yet, as not
all Member States have ratified it.

As regards protection of victims of crime in general, the Commission on 14 July 1999 adopted a
communication (3), striving for certain minimum levels or standards within the Union for some of the
aspects of the protection of victims of crime, notably prevention, assistance, compensation, and the
standing of victims in the criminal procedure. The communication is not specifically aimed at the victims
of the crimes mentioned by the Honourable Member, but many of the measures proposed by it would go
a long way towards improving their situation.

(1) OJ C 303 E, 24.10.2000, p. 111.
(2) Debates of the European Parliament (March 2000).
(3) COM(1999) 349 final.