WRITTEN QUESTION P-1746/00 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Framework for the sanctions against Austria ‐ Commission report.
Date: 2000-05-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, democracy, extreme right, international sanctions, intra-EU relations, rule of law

C 89 E/78

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.3.2001

Community and to support Member States in their risk management related decision-making processes by
providing a flexible tool to rank the risk potential of such plants.

(1) OJ L 230, 5.8.1982, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997, p. 13.

(2001/C 89 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1740/00

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Commission

(31 May 2000)

Subject: Funding of the pre-accession procedure for Cyprus and Malta

What action does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the appropriations provided for the
applicant countries Cyprus and Malta are moved from chapter B4 of the budget, concerning external aid,
to chapter B7, concerning pre-accession aid, in accordance with the guidelines for the 2001 budget that
Parliament has already voted on (paragraph 48)?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(6 July 2000)

As part of the a revision of the financial perspective (1), the Commission has proposed transferring the
amounts relating to financial support for Cyprus and Malta from heading 4 to heading 7. The aim of this
transfer is to harmonise the treatment of these two countries with that of the other candidate countries
already part of heading 7, which covers pre-accession (the Regulation on the pre-accession strategy for
Cyprus and Malta was adopted on 13 March 2000 (cid:129) Council Regulation (EC) No 555/2000) (2).

In this context, a subheading for the Mediterranean countries under heading 7 is being proposed (because
Cyprus and Malta cannot avail themselves of the Ispa and Sapard pre-accession instruments).

The amount of this transfer for the period 2001-2006 is € 20 million per year.

On the more strictly budgetary front, under the 2000 budgetary procedure, two new headings were
created under Title B7-0: B7-040 (cid:145)Pre-accession strategy for Malta(cid:146) and B7-041 (cid:145)Pre-accession strategy for
Cyprus(cid:146). These two headings were given a token entry (p.m.), since the relevant amounts are still entered
under heading B7-4012 (cid:145)Pre-accession strategy for Cyprus and Malta(cid:146).

In view of the adoption of the above-mentioned regulation, the Commission proposes to allocate amounts
to the two new headings in the preliminary draft budget (PDB) 2001. These will be € 7,5 million for Malta
(B7-040) and € 11,5 million for Cyprus.

(1) COM(2000) 262 final.
(2) OJ L 68, 16.3.2000.

(2001/C 89 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1746/00

by JosØ Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(25 May 2000)

Subject: Framework for the (cid:145)sanctions(cid:146) against Austria (cid:129) Commission report

It was recently publicly reported that the Austrian Chancellor, Mr Wolfgang Sch(cid:252)ssel, has asked the
Commission to draw up a rigorous report on the situation in Austria with reference to the (cid:145)sanctions(cid:146)
agreed and in force against Austria in the context of the EU. This report is to be prepared in time for the
forthcoming European Council, to be held in Santa Maria da Feira on 19 and 20 June 2000.

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/79

The framework for these (cid:145)sanctions(cid:146), as well as their basis in law and fact, is extremely unclear; at certain
moments it has been stated that they should be confined strictly to the level of bilateral relations between
Austria and the 14 other Member States. However, the disturbances which have occurred at summits and
other meetings in the practical functioning of the EU institutions at the highest level of the Council, a
number of decisions adopted by majority vote in the European Parliament, and the simple fact that the
(cid:145)sanctions(cid:146) were announced by the Council Presidency (cid:129) rather than as individual declarations by each of
the 14 other Member States, within the strict limits of bilateral relations as such (cid:129) have confirmed that we
are dealing with a policy which belongs, unambiguously,
the Union and its
operations.

to the framework of

The framework laid down by the Treaties in this respect is quite clear: it is defined in Articles 6 and 7 of
the Treaty on European Union (TEU). It is stated in Article 7(1) of the TEU that the Commission is one of
the EU bodies competent to report and to propose measures that it considers suitable.

It had generally been thought that the present moment was one of the (cid:145)enlargement(cid:146) of the Union, not of
its (cid:145)contraction(cid:146) (cid:129) a time for the affirmation of fundamental rights, not for riding roughshod over them.
Among other things, the Treaties need to respected by all: any breach of the Treaties or failure to respect
them can only have adverse consequences of unforeseeable amplitude, as the long and painful course of
history has confirmed when the settlement of international disputes is in question. Respect for the Treaties
is, indeed, a fundamental element of the rule of law, with which the Union as a whole, its bodies and its
Member States are obliged to comply to the highest degree (Article 6(1) of the TEU).

Can the Commission state whether, in conformity with the Treaties and the rule of law, it intends to act
on the request of the Austrian Chancellor, Mr Wolfgang Sch(cid:252)ssel, for a rigorous report to be drawn up on
the situation in Austria, in time for the summit to be held on 19/20 June 2000?

(2001/C 89 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1823/00

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

Subject: Commission report on the situation in Austria

(31 May 2000)

The Austrian Federal Chancellor has put forward the proposal that the Commission, as guardian of the
Treaties, should draw up a report on Austria. That document should investigate the situation in Austria
from the standpoint of compliance by the Austrian government and authorities with the fundamental
principles of the EU Treaty. On the basis of that report, an investigation should be conducted into whether
there are in fact any grounds for sanctions against Austria.

Under what circumstances would the Commission draw up a report on compliance with the

1.
principles of Article 6 of the EU Treaty in Austria?

The Commission is the guardian of the Treaties and continuously monitors for Member State
2.
compliance with the Treaties. Under what circumstances would the Commission draw up reports on
compliance with the principles of Article 6 of the EU Treaty in all Member States?

Does the Commission consider the sanctions imposed by the 14 against Austria as a violation of the

3.
EU Treaties?

Does the Commission consider that there are grounds in the Treaties for the measures taken by the

4.
14 against Austria?

5. What have been the results of permanent monitoring of Austria by the Commission hitherto?

Are there grounds for concluding that the fundamental values of the EU have been violated by FP(cid:214)

6.
(Freedom Party of Austria) participation in government? If so, what are they?

7.
The 14 Member States claim to have imposed bilateral sanctions. The decision was announced by the
Portuguese President of the Council. The 14 continue to claim that they could lift the sanctions only if
they acted jointly. Does the Commission see this as indicating that the action taken, far from being
bilateral, is in fact multilateral, and consequently is tantamount to a decision by the Council?