WRITTEN QUESTION E-3365/00 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Refusal to extradite.
Date: 2000-10-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, carrying out of sentence, crime against individuals, extradition, national law, organised crime

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/101

As drug addiction is a serious social problem requiring preventive action, would the Commission state:

1. Under which programme was this type of research funded?

2. On what grounds was this type of research, based on maintaining a drugs habit rather than research
into substitution treatment or preventive strategies, considered important and granted funding?

3. Were other research projects funded by the Commission involving other methods aimed at reducing

the use of, and demand for, drugs?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2001)

The study in question was funded in 1999 in the framework of the Programme of Community action on
the prevention of drug dependence (1996-2000). The name of the project is: Evaluation des Gesundheits-
raumangebots f(cid:252)r Drogenkonsumenten in drei Europ(cid:228)ischen St(cid:228)dten. The responsible organisation is
Institut f(cid:252)r Interdisziplin(cid:228)re Sucht- und Drogenforschung, Klinik f(cid:252)r Psychiatrie, University of Hamburg.

The evaluation study to be implemented in Hamburg, Rotterdam and Innsbruck is ongoing. The final
report will be submitted to the Commission by 1 April 2001. The Commission expects a scientifically valid
evaluation from the independent official body responsible. The questions of high interest are if and
eventually how, such a preventive care offer will reduce the risk behaviour of addicts and secondly, if and
eventually how,
the
controversy caused by trials with so called (cid:145)users(cid:146) rooms(cid:145). On the other hand, cities in several Members
States, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands have opened such users(cid:146) rooms where drugs can be consumed
under hygienic and supervised conditions. This is designed to achieve a reduction of the transmission of
infectious diseases and the risk of fatal overdoses. The result of the study should be of value for these
Member States as well as for others, not yet having decided whether to allow such experiments to be
undertaken or not.

improve and maintain their health. The Commission is fully aware of

it will

The overall objective of the drug prevention programme is nevertheless to contribute to reducing the
demand for illegal drugs in Europe. This focus remains clear in the implementation of the programme. The
Commission has over several years funded a variety of research projects and studies implemented with this
common aim.

(2001/C 163 E/109)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3365/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(27 October 2000)

Subject: Refusal to extradite

On 2 June 2000 the French police arrested, in Corsica, Mr Alvaro Lojacono, who had been sentenced to
life imprisonment for the murder (in 1978) of the politician Aldo Moro and his security guards and to
imprisonment for the murder of a medical student, Mikaeli Mantakas, who was killed on
16 years(cid:146)
28 February 1975 outside the headquarters of a political party (Movimento Sociale Italiano)
in via
Ottaviano, in Rome.

Despite his two convictions, Mr Lojacono has not served a single day of his sentence, as he went into
hiding immediately, changed his name, took Swiss citizenship and evaded all attempts to have him
extradited.

On 7 July 2000 Italy submitted a request
authorities, who, on 11 October 2000, released him and refused to extradite him to Italy.

for Mr Lojacono(cid:146)s extradition to the competent French

C 163 E/102

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Would it be possible, under the Treaties, for the European authorities to intervene in this matter to
enable the Italian justice system to fully exercise its rights, not least out of respect for the victims and
their families?

2. What is the Commission(cid:146)s opinion on the matter?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2000)

The Commission can not intervene in this matter, as only the Member States are competent to decide to
grant a request for extradition in a particular case.

However,
the deadline for ratification of the two Union Conventions on extradition agreed so far,
i.e. Convention on simplified extradition procedure between the Member States (1995) (1) and the
Convention relating to extradition between Member States (1996) (2), has been set for April 2001 by the
Vienna action plan (3). Moreover the Commission is currently preparing an initiative relating to the
extradition issue (abolition of formal extradition procedures concerning those fleeing from justice and
fast track extradition procedures as well as the issue of extradition in relation to procedures in absentia), in
line with the mandate in paragraph 35 of the Presidency conclusions of the Tampere European Council of
15 and 16 October 1999 and recommendation 28 of (cid:145)The Prevention and Control of Organised Crime:
A European Union Strategy for the Beginning of the New Millennium(cid:146) (4).

It should be noted that there already is a co-operation on extradition and other criminal matters on
a bilateral basis in the Union, though not between France and Italy. On 20 July 2000 a Protocol and a
joint declaration were signed in Madrid between the Italian and Spanish Justice ministers. The background
to the agreement is a number of misunderstandings, which have prevented the extradition of dangerous
criminals, who had been sentenced in absentia in Italy and sought refuge in Spain.

Lastly, on 29 November 2000 a bilateral treaty which abolishes extradition for specific serious crimes
between Spain and Italy was signed in the framework of the above indicated joint declaration in Rome.

(1) Ratified by Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland and Sweden.
(2) Ratified by Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, the Netherlands, Portugal and Finland.
(3) OJ C 19, 23.1.1999.
(4) OJ C 124, 3.5.2000.

(2001/C 163 E/110)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3368/00

by Thierry de La Perriere (UEN) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Problems concerning town twinning

A number of mayors have referred to the difficulties they have encountered this year in their twinning
work and their worries about the future. It would appear that we are heading for paralysis unless more
substantial resources and less technocratic instructions are swiftly introduced for those involved in
twinning schemes.

In particular, two points are posing real problems:

(cid:129) the long delay in processing applications for subsidies;

(cid:129) the obligation to issue calls to tender, which makes it more difficult for small towns to gain access to
funding, since they do not have staff specialised in the complex procedures involved in responding
to calls to tender and they have minimal financial resources.