WRITTEN QUESTION E-3526/00 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Ratification of the OECD convention on corrupt practices by European companies in other countries.
Date: 2000-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European undertaking, OECD, corruption, international convention

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/153

As far as the situation in the United States is concerned, the Commission is informed that the United States
Government has banned importation of and other commerce in dog and cat fur products (1). The bill states
that an estimated two million dogs and cats are slaughtered and sold annually as part of the international
fur trade, frequently based on deceptive or fraudulent labelling of products to disguise the true nature of
the fur. It amends the Tariff Act of 1930 by adding the prohibition of imports of dog and cat fur into
United States customs territory. Import prohibitions pertain to those subject to United States jurisdiction
and violators are made subject to civil penalties. The Commission services are currently analysing the
United States legislation in detail.

Non governmental organisations have also provided information to the Commission that may indicate that
a trade of cat and dog fur is taking place in Europe, in particular originating from Asia. However, data are
not available to evaluate the importance of this trade neither its evolution within or outside the Union.

The Commission will follow this matter and will initiate appropriate action if and when deemed necessary.

(1) Chapter 3 of HR 4868, the Tariff Suspension and Trade Act of 2000 (signed into law on 9 November and now

Public Law No106-476).

(2001/C 163 E/171)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3526/00

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Subject: Ratification of the OECD convention on corrupt practices by European companies in other

countries

In 1997 twenty-one countries signed an OECD convention on corrupt practices by European companies in
other countries.

Can the Commission say which EU Member States have now ratified the convention and which have not?

Can the Commission give the reasons for delays in ratification by some Member States?

Does the Commission realise that the EU is in a weak position when criticising corruption in Third World
countries if corrupt practices in third countries are still not a criminal offence in several Member States?

Does the Commission realise that if some Member States permit corrupt practices and others do not there
is, to put it cynically, a competitive advantage for some Member States in placing orders in third countries?

What does the Commission intend to do to force those EU Member States which have not yet done so to
ratify the convention as soon as possible?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2001)

To date, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Autria, Sweden, Finland, and the United
Kingdom have ratified the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Anti-bribery
convention (in force since February 1999). Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands are expected to

C 163 E/154

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

follow at the end of 2000 or beginning of 2001 and Portugal at a later stage in 2001. All relevant
information is on the OECD-website: http://www.oecd.org/daf/nocorruption/annex2.htm

It is generally acknowledged that, compared to other conventions, ratification and implementation of the
OECD anti-bribery convention have been rather speedy so far. The Commission however assumes that on
top of the usual difficulties with ratifying international legal texts, the (cid:145)lagging-behind(cid:146) of certain Member
States could be due to parallel ratification of a number of instruments dealing with corruption, drawn up
by the Community, the Council of Europe and the OECD respectively. Hence, they wish to adopt their
national legislation in compliance with all of these international texts, which differ in scope, Union and
Council of Europe conventions being more far-reaching.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that those countries that did not fully comply with
the highest international anti-corruption standards and still pointed to other countries with respect to their
corrupt practices would lose credibility. As stated above, all Member States will soon have enforceable laws
in place, which make the bribery of all foreign public officials including those of international public
organisations a punishable offence. In this context, the Commission wishes to highlight, that under the
recent Community (cid:129) African, Caribbean and Pacific States Agreement ((cid:145)LomØ V(cid:146)) signed in July 2000, the
fight against corruption will for the first time be an integral part of the Community(cid:146)s development policy.
A consultation procedure is foreseen in serious cases of corruption with the possibility of suspending
assistance. The Common service for external relations (SCR) manual of instructions on contracts for works,
supplies and services concluded for the purposes of Community cooperation with third countries already
provides the possibility to (cid:145)suspend or cancel project financing if corrupt practices of any kind are
discovered at any stage of the award process and if the contracting authority fails to take all appropriate
measures to remedy the situation.(cid:146)

In view of the above, there will be no longer any relevant discrepancy in Member States(cid:146) laws in this
respect. The Commission draws the Honourable Member(cid:146)s attention to the fact, that it was one of the
principal goals of the OECD Convention to even out inequalities in anti-corruption legislation with a view
to removing the unethical competitive advantages to which the Honourable Member refers.

The Community is not a party to the OECD Convention. The Commission has therefore no legal means to
influence the ratification procedures of Member States although it agrees with the Honourable Member
that swift ratification by the missing Member States would be highly desirable. The Commission also
recalls that it actively supported the preparation of the two Community joint positions, which contributed
to the establishment of the Convention.

(2001/C 163 E/172)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3527/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Subject: Access to basic knowledge

Universities and research institutions in Spain, Denmark, Sweden and France have submitted a project
entitled (cid:145)Children and adolescents with social difficulties in gaining access to basic knowledge: the new
technologies as tools for improving their educational and cultural resources(cid:146) (SERD-2000-00234).

Given this project(cid:146)s enormous importance to the whole issue of preventing social exclusion in years to
come, can the Commission tell me what stage it has got to in evaluating it?