WRITTEN QUESTION E-2655/00 by Diana Wallis (ELDR) to the Commission. Interception systems in the area of EU telecommunications.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: communications systems, personal data, protection of privacy, regulation of telecommunications, telecommunications

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/143

3.

(a) What legal measures is the Commission taking in order to reduce roaming charges, and thus
costs to the public, not least in view of Parliament(cid:146)s resolution of 18 May 2000 (A5-0231/00) and the
resolution of 13 June 2000 (A5-0258/00) (recital E, first indent) in which Parliament expresses the
view that these charges are too high?

(b) When does the Commission intend to complete this work?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 October 2000)

1.
On 27 July 1999 the Commission opened sector inquiries into three different areas of telecommu-
nications that are characterised by pricing anomalies: mobile roaming, leased lines, and local loop access
(unbundling). The Commission notes that Parliament resolution R5-0258/00 of 13 June 2000 shares its
concern that important mobile markets do not appear to be subject to effective competition. The mobile
markets that are apparently not subject to effective competition are the wholesale markets for roaming and
call termination, as well as the retail markets for mobile services based on these wholesale prices, and the
market for mobile international calls.

For practical reasons, the three sector inquiries were launched successively. As part of the roaming sector
inquiry, in January 2000 formal information requests were sent out to all mobile operators and service
providers in the Community, as well as to the national authorities in all Member States (see IP/00/111 of
4 February 2000). Additional requests for information have been sent to undertakings that responded in
an incomplete or incorrect manner. At present, the responses submitted to the formal information requests
are being processed and analysed. Based on co-operation under the European economic area (EEA)
Agreement, and on a parallel
investigation carried out by the European fair trade association (EFTA)
Surveillance Authority, the analysis involved will cover the entire EEA.

The Commission expects to complete its internal report on the roaming sector inquiry in October 2000.
At the end of November 2000, an expert meeting will take place with national authorities to discuss the
findings of the inquiry, and their follow-up.

2.

3.

The Commission cannot confirm the existence of such a ratio based on its findings so far.

(a) There are clear indications that the general price levels of mobile roaming rates cannot be
explained on technical grounds (e.g. mobile network costs), which is one of the main reasons why the
Commission decided to initiate its sector inquiry into these rates. Because the ongoing investigation is
based on the Community competition rules the Commission cannot reduce roaming prices in any
general or abstract sense. Instead, a determination whether particular roaming prices are in fact
excessive or discriminatory must be made in individual competition cases. Any subsequent findings of
infringements will have to be based on the facts found in those individual cases and cannot be
prejudged.

(b) After completing its general assessment of the roaming sector inquiry findings in October, the
Commission will decide on the appropriate follow up to this sector inquiry in November. However,
the Commission may decide to open individual cases at any time if sufficiently grave prima facie
evidence of infringements is found.

(2001/C 113 E/148)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2655/00

by Diana Wallis (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Interception systems in the area of EU telecommunications

In the European Parliament(cid:146)s confirmation hearing on Tuesday, 31 August 1999, Commissioner Liikanen
states that (cid:145)it is extremely important for us, of course, as was noted in the debate in Parliament last Spring,
that the values of European society are retained in the new system and that we do not accept the built-in
interception systems in our telecommunication area(cid:146).

C 113 E/144

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

Some Member States, most notably the United Kingdom, are now legislating the kind of built-in
interception systems which the Commissioner finds unacceptable. Does the Commission thus intend to
take any action to limit such (cid:145)unacceptable(cid:146) measures on the basis that they are a breach of the right to
privacy and free speech? Will the Commission ensure that any EU-wide attempts to impose such built-in
systems are subjected to the democratic control of the European Parliament?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 2000)

The Commission presumes the Honourable Member is referring to the Regulation of Investigative Powers
Act which was voted in the House of Commons of the United Kingdom on 26 July 2000. It received the
royal assent on 28 July 2000.

The draft of this Act was notified to the Commission on 23 February 2000 under the procedure foreseen
in Directive 98/34/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for
technical standards and regulations (1), also called the
the provision of
(cid:145)transparency directive(cid:146).

information in the field of

The Commission is currently examining the Act to determine if it is compatible with the provisions of
several Community dispositions including the Annex to Directive 97/13/EC of the Parliament and of the
Council of 10 April 1997 on a common framework for general authorisations and individual licences in
the field of telecommunications services (2) which recognises that the conditions for licences are (cid:145)without
prejudice (cid:133) to measures taken by the Member States in accordance with public interest requirements
recognised by the Treaty [(cid:133)] specifically in relation to [(cid:133)] public security.(cid:146)

Further, Article 5 of Directive 97/66/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997
concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the telecommunications
sector (3) guarantees the confidentiality of communications by means of a public telecommunications
network and publicly available telecommunications services. Member States shall prohibit the listening,
tapping, storage or other kinds of interception or surveillance of communications by others than users,
without the consent of the users concerned, except when legally authorised in accordance with Article
14(1). According to this Article, Member States cannot limit by law their obligation of ensuring the
confidentiality of networks for reasons of important economic or financial interest of a Member State,
unless it is necessary to safeguard national security, defence, public safety, the prevention, investigation,
detection and prosecution of criminal offences or of unauthorised use of the telecommunications system.
In addition Directive 97/66/EC provides for protection of the legitimate interests of legal persons as
subscribers of telecommunication services,
for example business companies and the secrecy of their
communications over public networks.

In addition Directive 95/46/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection
of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (4)
ensures free flow of data. Directive 97/66/EC complements and specifies the general directive for the
processing of personal data and in particular the confidentiality of communications in the telecommunica-
tions sector. It also protects data and communications of legal persons.

Finally the Commission is examining the Act in the light of Article 49 (ex Article 59) of the EC Treaty to
see if it creates any obstacles to the free movement of services of by imposing specific obligations on the
providers of information society services related to the interception of telecommunications, the acquisition
of communications data and access to encrypted data.

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/145

As for the second part of the question the Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that
the Commission is not aware of any attempt to impose built-in interception systems on a Community
wide scale.

(1) OJ L 204, 21.7.1998.
(2) OJ L 117, 7.5.1997.
(3) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998.
(4) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.

(2001/C 113 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2656/00

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Bullfighting

Will the Commission please confirm or deny reports that a new 5 000-seat arena to accommodate the
barbaric activity of bullfighting is to be built in the Azores, with reported financial support from the
European Union?

Will the Commission also comment on the Portuguese Parliament(cid:146)s decision on 1 June to introduce a new
law that will effectively legalise lethal bullfights, for the first time in 70 years, because organisers and
participants are likely to have no difficulty in paying whatever fines are levied, from the event revenues?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 2000)

According to the information that
the Commission has obtained from the national authorities, no
Community financial support has been provided for the construction or upgrading of an arena in the
Azores.

As far as the Commission knows, the new law adopted by the Portuguese Parliament does not legalise the
death of bulls in bull-fights and continues to levy fines on those who perform such acts or organise shows
of this kind.

The Commission(cid:146)s responsibilities towards animal protection have increased under the recent amendment
of the EC Treaty (1), which includes a protocol requiring the European institutions and Member States to
pay full regard to animal welfare when drawing up agriculture, transport, single market and research
policies. In doing so, however, Community institutions and the Member States are required to respect the
legislative and administrative provisions and customs of Member States relating in particular to religious
rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage.

Bullfighting is an example where the Community is not considered to have legal competence. This domain
is therefore under the responsibility of Member States.

(1) Protocol on protection and welfare of animals, (OJ C 340, 10.11.1997).