WRITTEN QUESTION E-2884/00 by Erika Mann (PSE) to the Council. Decision of 14 August 2000 on public access to Council documents (2000/527/EC).
Date: 2000-09-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, EU police cooperation, EU publication, access to information, common foreign and security policy, right to information

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/203

Reply

(20 November 2000)

The Council entirely agrees with the Honourable Member that illegal immigration into Europe is
1.
turning into a kind of slave trade which degrades human dignity, often at the cost of human lives. It would
refer the Honourable Member to the Council(cid:146)s reply to Written Question P-1391/00 put by Rodi Kratsa-
Tsagaropoulou.

It is not for the Council to express any views on the alignment of the Spanish (cid:145)Ley de Extranjer(cid:237)a(cid:146) on
2.
the EU acquis. Following entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty, questions to do with immigration, visas
and asylum come within the Community(cid:146)s sphere of competence (Title IV TEC). It is therefore for the
Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to ensure that Member States fulfil their obligations in those
matters.

(2001/C 113 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2884/00

by Erika Mann (PSE) to the Council

(13 September 2000)

Subject: Decision of 14 August 2000 on public access to Council documents (2000/527/EC)

The Council decision of 14 August 2000 (2000/527/EC) (1) focuses on documents which relate to (cid:145)matters
concerning the security and defence of the Union or of one or more of its Member States or on military or
non-military crisis management(cid:146). The respective ranges of the European Union(cid:146)s second and third pillars
increasingly overlap in security matters (e.g. foreign policy and immigration). Does the above formulation
mean that the proposal can also indirectly bear on documents relating to police and judicial cooperation in
criminal matters? What exactly comes under the term (cid:145)non-military crisis management(cid:146)?

If the author of the document concerned is (cid:145)a natural or legal person, a Member State, another Community
institution or body or any other national or international body(cid:146), documents in the field of affect by the
decision may only be published with the author(cid:146)s written consent. What is the relevance of paragraph 3
which is added to Article 2 of Decision 93/731/EC (2) as a supplement?

The public has access to documents, except where they are classified as (cid:145)TrŁs Secret / Top Secret(cid:146), (cid:145)Secret(cid:146)
or (cid:145)Confidential(cid:146). Who is responsible for the classification of Council documents? On what criteria does the
Council classify documents (cid:145)TrŁs Secret/Top Secret(cid:146),
(cid:145)Secret(cid:146) or (cid:145)Confidential(cid:146)? Is provision made for an
expiry date after which classified documents are released?

Does not the extension undertaken under the second paragraph of Article 2 of Decision 2000/527/EC
with the addition of the term (cid:145)non-military crisis management(cid:146) within the definition (cid:145)protection of the
public interest(cid:146) of Decision 93/731/EC (public security, the security and defence of the Union or of one or
more of its Member States, military or non-military crisis management, international relations, monetary
stability, court proceedings, inspections and investigations) mean that through the addition of that term,
the boundary between the military-operational field and the political field becomes blurred?

(1) OJ L 212, 23.8.2000, p. 9.
(2) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 43.

Reply

(30 November 2000)

1.
As is clear from the first recital of Decision 2000/527/EC, that Decision is one of the measures
necessary to implement the conclusions of the European Council meeting in Helsinki in December 1999,
which adopted two Presidency reports (see Annex IV to the Presidency conclusions) on developing the EU(cid:146)s

C 113 E/204

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

means for military and non-military crisis management in the framework of a strengthened European
security and defence policy. For a definition of what is meant by (cid:145)non-military crisis management(cid:146) in this
context the Honourable Member is asked to refer to Annex 2 to Annex IV to the Presidency conclusions.

New paragraph 3 of Article 2 of Decision 93/731/EC relates to the handling of Council documents
2.
which enable conclusions to be drawn regarding the content of information received from third parties.
Paragraph 2, on the other hand, relates to documents written by persons outside the Council. In the first
case the prior consent of the author of the information is required before the document can be released,
and in the second case the person requesting the document must apply directly to the author.

3.
The measures for the protection of classified information applicable to the General Secretariat of the
Council, including the classification criteria, are set out in the Decision of the Secretary-General of the
Council/High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy of 27 July 2000 (1).

4.
The reference to the security and defence of the Union or of one or more of its Member States and
to military and non-military crisis management (for a definition of these terms see point 1 above) as part
of the concept of public interest (first indent of Article 4(1) of Decision 93/731/EC) is simply intended to
make it clear that these matters must be taken into account by the Council when examining a request for
access to a document which falls within the scope of Decision 93/731/EC.

(1) OJ C 239, 23.8.2000.

(2001/C 113 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2885/00

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Subject: European Consumer Infocentres

In 1991, the Commission launched a consumer information pilot programme providing for information of
a legal nature, legal aid and advice. It was for this purpose that the European Consumer Infocentres were
set up.

Through its Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection, the Commission provides 50 % of
the funding for this programme, with a ceiling of € 160 000 per case. In 1997, a proposal was made to
increase the ceiling to € 200 000 and to set up at least one centre per Member State.

Today, three years later, there are centres in only nine Member States.

Nine years after its launch, why are the results of this programme so disappointing? What is the reason for
this situation and what does the Commission intend to do in future?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 2000)

In 1997, the Commission carried out an assessment of the cross-border Infocentre or (cid:145)Euroguichet(cid:146) pilot
project, launched in 1991.

On the basis of this assessment and in the interests of completing the single market, the Commission
decided to reform these cross-border advisory structures, developing them into a Community network of
European consumer centres.

While it is still the job of these centres to assist and advise consumers in the event of disputes, particularly
of a cross-border nature, their main purpose now is clearly to disseminate information on consumer affairs
at Community level in the Member States, and to allow information exchange between the Member States.