WRITTEN QUESTION P-2801/00 by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission. Prohibition of so-called Combat Dogs.
Date: 2000-09-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: competence of the Member States, domestic animal, livestock farming, physical aggression, public safety

C 113 E/178

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

(2001/C 113 E/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2801/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Prohibition of so-called (cid:145)Combat Dogs(cid:146)

In relation to the following statement which appeared recently on the German Government(cid:146)s website:

(cid:133) a decrease of the aggressiveness and attitude is to be achieved by banning [32 breeds] of dogs.
Additionally, Federal Minister Shily took the initiative to request a general prohibition of combat dogs
on a European Union level. He asked the French presidency to consider the topic: (cid:145)European Union (cid:129)
prohibition of the import and breeding of combat dogs and fighting dogs(cid:146) at the next interior session
of the Ministers of Justice and of the European Union Member States.

Can the Commission please provide information on the following questions:

1. Will the issue of repressive measures against 32 breeds of (cid:145)combat dogs(cid:146) be considered at the next

interior session of the Ministers of Justice?

2.

If so, when will proposals come before the European Parliament?

3. What department of the European Commission will be considering this matter and to whom may

thousands of dog-owners in the United Kingdom make representations on this issue?

4. What has this issue got to do with the European Union anyway? How does it help the Single Market?

Surely each nation-state should determine its own policy on these issues?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 2000)

An item (cid:145)Combat dogs(cid:146) was on the agenda of the Meeting of the Council (Justice and Home Affairs)

1.
of 28 September under any other business.

The result of the discussions on this item at the meeting of the Council will be communicated to the

2.
Parliament in the framework of the usual follow-up of Council meetings.

3.
As things stand, and given the lack of Community harmonisation of the conditions for keeping
combat dogs, the Commission takes the view that it is up to Member States to adopt the appropriate
measures for protecting human life, and to do so on the basis of the principle of subsidiarity and in
accordance with the rules of the Treaty, in particular Articles 28 and 30 (ex Articles 30 and 36) thereof.

According to Article 28 of the EC Treaty, Member States could not adapt national measures that create
barriers to the movements of the dogs concerned. Nevertheless, Article 30 of the EC Treaty authorises the
adoption of such measures when they are justified on grounds of public morality and the protection of the
health and life of humans and animals. However, these barriers may not constitute a means of arbitrary
discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.

When applied to the case in point, these general principles limit Member States(cid:146) scope for action, in that
the measures applied to animals reared on their territory could not differ from those applied to animals
from other Member States.

However,
if these principles are complied with, any Member State may fix at national level the rules
concerning the protection of human life, although such rules could not go beyond what was strictly
necessary in order to avoid the danger represented by the dogs concerned.

4.
Furthermore, the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the German authorities
have just informed the Commission, under the notification procedure introduced by Directive 98/34/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of
information in the field of technical standards and regulations, (1) of a bill on protection against dangerous
dogs. As this bill is currently under examination, the Commission cannot, at this stage, give an opinion on
its compatibility with Community law.

(1) OJ L 204, 21.7.1998.