WRITTEN QUESTION E-2261/00 by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Council. Schengen area: cooperation among the Member States' border control services.
Date: 2000-07-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: border control, cooperation in home affairs

C 103 E/100

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

(2001/C 103 E/109)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2261/00

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Council

(7 July 2000)

Subject: Schengen area: cooperation among the Member States(cid:146) border control services

On 19 June 2000 the discovery of the bodies of 58 illegal immigrants who died as a result of their
horrifying journey to Great Britain sent a tragic message to the European Union. It reminded us that the
abolition of systematic controls at the internal borders of the Schengen area represents a challenge for the
customs authorities of the EU Member States. The victims were discovered when a customs check was
carried out at Dover, which is outside the Schengen area, although the vehicle carrying them had passed
through two ports inside the Schengen area, Rotterdam and Zeebrugge.

The Tampere European Council of 15/16 October 1999 called in its conclusions for closer cooperation
and mutual technical assistance among the Member States(cid:146) border control services, particularly at maritime
frontiers.

1. What initiatives has the Council proposed, further to the conclusions of the Tampere European
Council, with a view to improving cooperation among the Member States(cid:146) border control services?

2.
Considering that prior to the tragedy which occurred on 19 June 2000 the incriminated vehicle had
crossed the borders of two Member States within the Schengen area, without being checked, does the
Council intend to propose specific measures for the implementation of customs controls in the ports
belonging to the Schengen area?

3.
The Tampere European Council decided to set up a unit (Eurojust) with the task of reinforcing the
fight against serious forms of organised crime: will trafficking in illegal immigrants be one of Eurojust(cid:146)s
priority areas of action? Are cooperation mechanisms between Eurojust and Member States(cid:146) border control
services envisaged?

Reply

(7 November 2000)

The Member States(cid:146) border control services cooperate with each other on a daily basis.

This cooperation may take different forms:

(cid:129) contacts by telephone, or by some other means, in specific cases. Member States have a list of contact

points for this purpose;

(cid:129) exchanges of officials between Member States(cid:146) border control services;

(cid:129) seminars on specific subjects, such as the seminar on maritime frontiers which was held in June in

Lisbon during the Portuguese Presidency.

in the appropriate Council working parties (cid:129) particularly Cirefi (Centre for Information,
Furthermore,
Discussion and Exchange on the Crossing of Frontiers and Immigration) (cid:129) Member States exchange
information on illegal
facilitators and other matters concerning frontiers and
immigration.

immigration, routes,

On the question of initiatives by Member States, a number of studies or initiatives are under way in the
following areas:

(cid:129) responsibility in respect of ships(cid:146) stowaways. A questionnaire was sent out on this matter during the

Portuguese Presidency, and the results are currently being examined;

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/101

(cid:129) initiative by the French Republic with a view to the adoption of a Directive on the responsibility of
carriers. This initiative provides for the imposition of penalties by Member States on carriers
transporting into the territory of the Member States third country nationals not in possession of the
documents necessary for admission into the territory of the said States. The initiative also takes
account of the protection due to asylum applicants;

(cid:129) initiative of the French Republic with a view to the adoption of a draft Directive together with a draft
framework Decision on the prevention of unauthorised entry and residence. The draft texts are
intended to establish a framework of penalties for facilitators.

The Council is also expecting a number of Commission proposals in this area.

As regards the strengthening of customs controls, the Council would point to the Convention of
1.
26 July 1995 on the use of
information technology for customs purposes and the Convention of
18 December 1997 on mutual assistance and cooperation between customs administrations. These
Conventions (1) have not yet been adopted by all the Member States in accordance with their respective
constitutional rules.

2.
In addition, the Council would refer to the possibilities for intensified policing through projects for
recognised routes as provided for in the Resolution of 27 May 1999 on combating international crime
with fuller cover of the routes used (2).

The Tampere European Council(cid:146)s conclusions state that Eurojust will have the task of facilitating the
3.
proper coordination of national prosecuting authorities and of supporting criminal
investigations in
organised crime cases. The German delegation on the one hand, and the Portuguese, French, Swedish
and Belgian delegations, on the other, have forwarded draft Decisions setting up Eurojust.

The two draft Decisions concerned cover ways of combating trafficking in human beings; the first one
indirectly, in that it makes Eurojust responsible for supporting criminal investigations into particularly
serious crimes requiring recourse to mutual legal assistance if they are to be solved (3), and the other
explicitly, by incorporating trafficking in human beings (cid:129) as defined in the Council Decision of
3 December 1998 supplementing the definition in the Annex to the Europol Convention (4) (cid:129) into
Eurojust(cid:146)s sphere of competence.

(1) OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 33 and OJ C 24, 23.1.1998, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 162, 9.6.1999, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 206, 19.7.2000, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 26, 30.1.1999, p. 21.

(2001/C 103 E/110)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2269/00

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallstr(cid:246)m (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Subject: Insurance in Russia

According to information obtained from the Finnish authorities, the Russian authorities are requiring
Finnish nationals travelling in their country to take out special insurance with Russian insurance firms and
do not recognise travel insurance taken out with firms operating in the European Union. This principle is
directly contrary international insurance conventions and causes unjustifiable harm to Finnish nationals
travelling in Russia.

What measures does the Commission propose to take to place pressure on the Russian government to halt
its arbitrary action with regard to the validity of insurance?