WRITTEN QUESTION E-3318/00 by Gorka Knörr Borràs (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Arrests in Turkey.
Date: 2000-10-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Türkiye, accession to the European Union, freedom of expression, imprisonment, political parties

C 163 E/84

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

In view of the EU(cid:146)s refusal to market US hormone-treated meat, the US has decided to penalise certain EU
products. The US Trade Secretary has proposed that the total value of the products affected should be
USD 380 million; the WTO has limited this total to USD 118 million.

This blacklist includes mandarins (satsuma and segmented in general), exports of which account for
USD 24 million, or 20 % of the above-cited figure. The penalty consists of a doubling of import prices for
mandarins (satsuma and segmented in general). The logical consequence would mean it being impossible
to export to the US: Spain, and the Valencia region in particular, would be restricted to the European
market, which cannot absorb the entire production.

What action does the Commission intend to take for the exclusion of satsuma mandarins from the
blacklist, given that Spain is the sole producer of this fruit in the EU and that the penalties on satsuma
mandarins alone represent 20 % of the total?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2000)

From 29 July 1999, the United States applied 100 % tariffs on imports from the Community (except the
United Kingdom) of a range of mainly agricultural products by way of retaliation in the hormones dispute.
Although (cid:145)prepared or preserved satsumas(cid:146) under American Harmonised Tariff System numbers 20083042
and 20083046 were initially considered in 1999 for 100 % punitive duties, they were not included in the
final retaliation list at that time.

On 18 May 2000, American legislation (often referred to as the (cid:145)carousel legislation(cid:146)) entered into force,
which provided for the American Administration to rotate the list of products subject to American trade
retaliation. In this context, the United States republished on 26 May 2000 the list of products originally
considered for the application of sanctions in the bananas and hormones dispute. Prepared or preserved
satsumas were included in the hormones list.

The Commission is very concerned by the United States(cid:146) counterproductive action both with regard to the
use of retaliatory measures in these disputes and the attempt to increase damage by use of carousel. This is
why the Commission has consistently argued that in order to reduce trade friction in the hormones
dispute, the trade-disrupting American retaliation should be replaced at the earliest opportunity by trade-
expanding (cid:145)compensation(cid:146) in the form of increased access to the Community market.

The Commission, with the unanimous support of
immediately started dispute
settlement proceedings in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) against the carousel legislation, which
the Commission considers illegal. Since then, the United States has refrained from actually implementing
the legislation.

the Member States,

(2001/C 163 E/090)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3318/00

by Gorka Kn(cid:246)rr Borr(cid:224)s (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(25 October 2000)

Subject: Arrests in Turkey

On 23 September this year 11 members of the pro-Kurdish Popular Democratic Party (HADEP), including
the party chairman, were arrested in the Turkish city of Simak. They were charged by the police with
possession of weapons and grenades. It should be borne in mind both that HADEP has always advocated
peaceful solutions to the Kurdish conflict and that once again the Turkish security forces have acted in an
underhand way.

Does the Council know about this incident? What view does it take of it? What measures does it propose
to settle the Kurdish conflict?

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/85

Reply

(26 February 2001)

The Council is aware of recent arrests and convictions of officials and supporters of the HADEP political
party, and will be monitoring this case closely. In EU-Turkey meetings, the EU takes the opportunity to
express concern over the treatment by the Turkish authorities of HADEP and its members, particularly in
the context of the Turkish candidature for the EU and the Copenhagen criteria. Legal reform to permit
genuine freedom of expression without fear of arrest is an essential element, and the European Union will
continue to insist that the Turkish Government take the necessary steps to that end as soon as possible.

(2001/C 163 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3319/00

by Gorka Kn(cid:246)rr Borr(cid:224)s (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 October 2000)

Subject: Arrests in Turkey

On 23 September this year 11 members of the pro-Kurdish Popular Democratic Party (HADEP), including
the party chairman, were arrested in the Turkish city of Simak. They were charged by the police with
possession of weapons and grenades. It should be borne in mind both that HADEP has always advocated
peaceful solutions to the Kurdish conflict and that once again the Turkish security forces have acted in an
underhand way.

Does the Commission know about this incident? What view does it take of it? What measures does it
propose to settle the Kurdish conflict?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(13 December 2000)

The Commission has been informed about the case mentioned by the Honourable Member and is
following its development.

Concerning the question of Turkish citizens of Kurdish origin, the two regular reports in 1998 and 1999
underlined that (cid:145)a civil solution could include recognition of certain forms of Kurdish cultural identity and
greater tolerance of the ways of expressing that identity, provided it does not advocate separatism or
terrorism(cid:146).

The last regular report, adopted by the Commission on 8 November 2000 (1), makes the following
assessment: (cid:145)Regardless of whether or not Turkey is willing to consider any ethnical groups with a cultural
identity and common traditions as (cid:145)national minorities(cid:146), members of such groups are clearly still largely
denied certain basic rights. Cultural rights for all Turks, irrespective of their ethnic origin, such as the right
to broadcast in their mother tongue, to learn their mother tongue or to receive instruction in their mother
tongue, are not guaranteed (see the above section on economic, social and cultural rights). In addition,
these citizens are not given opportunities to express their views on such issues(cid:146).

Guaranteeing cultural rights for all citizens irrespective of their origin is also a medium-term priority
contained in the Commission(cid:146)s proposal of 8 November for a Council decision on the principles, priorities,
intermediate objectives and conditions contained in the Accession Partnership with Turkey.

(1) COM(2000) 714 final.