WRITTEN QUESTION P-3214/00 by Enrique Barón Crespo (PSE) to the Council. EU-UN co-operation on crisis management and conflict prevention.
Date: 2000-10-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: UNO, common foreign and security policy, conflict prevention, institutional cooperation, the EU's international role

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/205

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(21 November 2000)

Council Directive 92/46/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the health rules for the production and placing
on the market of raw milk, heat-treated milk and milk-based products, provides under Article 8 that
Member States may grant derogations for certain requirements of the Directive for the manufacture of
cheese with a maturation period of at least sixty days or for the manufacture of milk-based products with
traditional characteristics.

Council Directive 92/46/EEC was transposed into Italian national law by Presidential Decree No 54/97 of
14 January 1997 (1). In the Commission(cid:146)s opinion Article 9 of this Decree contains derogations that do not
comply with Article 8 of the aforementioned Directive. As a result, the Commission will raise the matter
with the Member State concerned to ensure that the Directive is transposed properly, and will, if necessary,
initiate infringement proceedings under Article 226 (formerly Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

As regards the Honorable Member(cid:146)s last question, the Commission does not intend to make any new
regulatory proposals, as the protected designation of origin (PDO) registration procedure already requires
that candidate products for this designation comply with all the applicable regulations, among others
health regulations.

(1) GURI No 59, 12.3.1997.

(2001/C 136 E/240)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3213/00

by Jillian Evans (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Innovative actions unit (DG-REGIO)

Can the Commission confirm that it intends closing down the Innovative Actions Unit in DG-Regio, which
is responsible for small projects under Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund, without
any cost/benefit analysis? If so, can the Commission justify this decision?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2000)

The Commission can confirm that it does not intend to close down the Innovative Measures Unit in DG
Regio. The mission of this unit, on the one hand, is implementing and closing the innovative measures
decided under the previous rules of the Structural Funds (1) and, on the other hand, of launching the new
pilot projects and exchanges of experience as laid down in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1783/1999 of
the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 1999, on the European Regional Development
Fund (2).

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2083/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4254/88 laying down
provisions for the application of Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 on the European Regional Development Fund (cid:129)
published in OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(2) OJ L 213, 13.8.1999.

(2001/C 136 E/241)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3214/00

by Enrique Bar(cid:243)n Crespo (PSE) to the Council

(20 October 2000)

Subject: EU-UN co-operation on crisis management and conflict prevention

On 15 September a meeting of the UN and the EU took place to discuss co-operation in the area of crisis
management and conflict prevention.

C 136 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

What was the agenda of this meeting and what were the conclusions?

Were these issues discussed again when Mr Kofi ANNAN visited Europe?

What is the EU position on co-operation with the UN in this area, and what role should the UN be given
in the elaboration of the Helsinki agreements concerning CFSP?

What could be the EU(cid:146)s concrete contribution towards strengthening the capacities of the UN in crisis
management and conflict prevention?

Will these issues be discussed during the upcoming European Council meeting?

What will be the future format of dialogue between the UN and the EU on crisis management and conflict
prevention?

Reply

(20/21 December 2000)

1.
The ministerial meeting to which the Honourable Member refers was held in New York on
13 September 2000 between the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Kofi Annan, and the EU
ministerial troika composed of the President of the Council, Mr Hubert VØdrine, the Minister for Foreign
Affairs of Sweden, Mrs Lindh, the European Commissioner for External Relations, Mr Patten, and the
Secretary-General of the Council/High Representative of the EU for the CFSP, Mr Javier Solana.

2.
The agenda for that meeting was devoted to cooperation between the EU and the United Nations in
the area of crisis management. The meeting provided both parties with the opportunity to restate ongoing
developments in this area in the context of their respective organisations and to voice their joint hope for
increased cooperation in this field. Following the invitation issued by the President of the Council in his
address to the General Assembly on 12 October 2000, the parties agreed at the ministerial meeting to
continue their dialogue on this topic during a visit to Europe by the United Nations Secretary-General.

3.
In the context of this visit, and in the wake of the meetings held with the Commission and the
European Parliament, Mr Annan met Mr VØdrine in Paris on 4 October 2000 and Mr Solana in Brussels on
the following day for further EU/UN discussions on the possibilities for cooperation in this field. In this
connection, Mr Annan proposed establishing cooperation and coordination procedures between the two
organisations.

4. With regard to cooperation with the UN, the conclusions of the Santa Maria da Feira European
Council reaffirm, inter alia, the commitment to building a Common European Security and Defence Policy
capable of reinforcing the Union(cid:146)s external action through the development of a military crisis-manage-
ment capability as well as a civilian one, in full respect of the principles of the United Nations Charter. In
this regard, the European Council emphasised the importance of ensuring a close relationship between the
military and the civilian fields in Union crisis management. It also stressed the importance of cooperation
between the Union(cid:146)s rapidly evolving crisis-management capability and the United Nations, the OSCE and
the Council of Europe. Cooperation with the UN is also fully implicit in the conclusions of the Helsinki
European Council, which lay down the objective of reinforcing and facilitating both the UN contributions
and activities of the EU when it is a leading player in a particular crisis and independent action by the EU.

5.
The Council began internal discussions on the appropriate procedures for actual cooperation between
the EU and the UN. At the same time, contacts with the United Nations were stepped up, while in the
framework of the conclusions of the Santa Maria da Feira European Council specific themes of interest to
both organisations were identified, together with the organisational elements essential to close cooperation.
An initial meeting was duly held in Brussels on 24 October between the Committee for Civilian Aspects of
Crisis Management and United Nations representatives (in the main from the OCHA (Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) and the DPKO (Department for Peace Keeping Operations), together
with OSCE and Council of Europe representatives. In addition, the French Presidency organised a seminar
in Brussels on 25 October 2000, to which experts from these organisations were invited, on reinforcing
the rule of law in crisis management.

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/207

The Nice European Council will receive a report from the Presidency on the work carried out within
6.
the Council on the whole issue of crisis management, including relations with the United Nations in this
area. On the question of the framework and detailed arrangements for the dialogue between the two
organisations on crisis management and conflict prevention, the Council is not yet in a position to reply at
the present stage of discussions both within the EU and with the United Nations and of work on the
reorganisation of these activities within the framework of the United Nations (along the lines indicated in
the Brahimi report).

(2001/C 136 E/242)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3216/00

by Mar(cid:237)a Izquierdo Rojo (PSE) to the Council

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Maryam Arubi sentenced to death by stoning for adultery

Is the Council aware that Maryam Arubi (30), found guilty of adultery, was sentenced to death by stoning
under the Iranian penal code based on the Islamic sharia? Could EU representatives and representations
abroad take this serious human rights situation in Iran into account when the forthcoming UN resolutions
are being prepared and adopted, including those being drawn up at this moment for the Millennium
Summit?

Reply

(20/21 December 2000)

The Council was not aware of the case referred to by the Honourable Member.

Abolition of the death penalty in all countries is a principle which is stoutly defended by all the Member
States of the European Union. Moreover, the Council would point out that stoning is prohibited under the
Convention against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment. Executions by
stoning are now rare in Iran, but unfortunately they do still take place.

The European Union has made its position clear to the Iranian authorities at meetings which have taken
place in the framework of the political dialogue and has urged that steps be taken to abolish the death
penalty. The European Union has asked Iran, as a first step, to declare a moratorium on executions, with a
view to eventual total abolition, and to step up the progress being made on human rights.

Over the last few years the European Union has taken initiatives within the UNO to secure the adoption of
including the death penalty. The European Union has therefore
resolutions on human rights in Iran,
decided to submit a proposal for a resolution to the current session of the General Assembly.

(2001/C 136 E/243)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3217/00

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Violation of safety rules by Macedonian Airlines in Greece

(12 October 2000)

The Greek Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued a decision on 3 February 2000 (YPA/D2/G/5238/1387)
ordering checks on the technical operation and maintenance of Macedonian Airlines A.E.
(MA A.E.),
a subsidiary of Olympic Airways A.E.
(OA A.E.). The check revealed serious violations, sufficient (cid:129)
according to the report (cid:129) to warrant the suspension of MA A.E.(cid:146)s air operator(cid:146)s certificate.