WRITTEN QUESTION P-3912/00 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Implementation of environmental legislation in Greece, ECJ Judgment C-387/97 and the examination of the charges brought concerning the project to build a link across the Gulf of Malia.
Date: 2000-12-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, application of EU law, environmental protection

C 174 E/182

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

Reply

(12 March 2001)

The Council recently received from the Commission a draft proposal for a Council recommendation on
(cid:145)Drinking of alcohol by children and adolescents(cid:146) (1) which was presented in response to an invitation from
the Council in an earlier resolution on alcohol abuse (2). It is expected that work will progress on this
proposal as a matter of priority and that the recommendation will be adopted at the (cid:145)Health(cid:146) Council on
31 May 2001.

It should also be pointed out that an explicit objective of the current Community action programme on
health promotion, information, education and training within the framework for action in the field of
public health (1996-2000) (3) is the promotion of examination, assessment and exchange of experience and
support for actions concerning measures to prevent alcohol abuse and the health and social consequences
thereof. This action programme has been extended until 31 December 2002 or until the date of entry into
force of a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council adopting a new programme of
Community action in the field of public health, whichever is earlier. The proposal for a decision on a
new programme foresees, inter alia, the preparation and implementation of strategies and measures on life-
style related health determinants such as alcohol.

(1) 14270/00 SAN 137, 4/12/00.
(2) OJ C 184, 23.7.1986, p. 3.
(3) OJ L 95, 16.4.1996, p. 1.

(2001/C 174 E/194)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3912/00

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 December 2000)

Subject: Implementation of environmental legislation in Greece, ECJ Judgment C-387/97 and the examina-
tion of the charges brought concerning the project to build a link across the Gulf of Malia

In view of the fact that Greece has failed effectively to transpose into national law and to comply with
many regulations of secondary Community legislation on environmental protection and given also that the
judgments of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on respecting environmental legislation in Greece are
rarely implemented, resulting in a host of indictments and a very substantial loss of national financial
resources,

will the Commission say:

1. What progress has been made in implementing ECJ judgment C-387/97 of 4 July 2000 concerning
the payment by Greece to the Commission into the (cid:145)EC own resources(cid:146) account of a daily fine of
€ 20 000 owing to the illegal operation of the Kouroupitos waste tip in Crete, how have the Greek
authorities responded to the Commission(cid:146)s letter of 9 November 2000 and what is the total sum due?

2. What measures does it consider would suffice to put an end to the violation of the implementation of
the first judgment by the Court of Justice (C-45/91) and how will compliance by the Greek authorities
be established?

3.

Is it in a position to take a decision on the payment of the daily financial penalty after compliance
with the judgments handed down by the ECJ in the event of a fresh violation and what provision been
made by the Commission to ensure the full implementation of the judgments in question?

4. What stage have the proceedings against Greece reached for failing correctly to transpose or violating
Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment (as amended by Directive 97/11/EC) (2), Directive 92/43/EEC (3) on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora and Directive 79/409/EEC (4) on the conservation of wild
birds?

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/183

5. What measures has it taken or does it intend to take in view of the alleged violations in respect of the
project to build an underwater link in the Gulf of Malia and what has the response of the Greek
authorities been as regards finding alternative solutions?

6.

Is it possible for the project to be co-funded from Community funds if Community legislation is being
it take to avert the danger of a loss of funds owing to the
violated, and what measures will
implementation of the new strict laws regarding the disbursing and taking-up of structural fund
resources under the third CSF?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(4) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 2001)

In its judgment of 4 July 2000 (1), the Court of Justice ordered Greece to pay into the (cid:145)EC(cid:146)s own
1.
resources account(cid:146) a fine of € 20 000 for each day(cid:146)s delay in taking the action needed to comply with the
judgement of 7 April 1992 in Commission v. Greece, starting on the day on which the judgment was
handed down and until the date of compliance. Greece must therefore pay the daily fine of € 20 000 as
from 4 July 2000.

On 20 October 2000 the Commission sent the Greek authorities a letter, in accordance with current
rules (2), asking them to pay, at the latest two months after receiving the letter, the sum of € 1 760 000
representing the daily payment of € 20 000 per day due for the months of July to September 2000.
Furthermore, the Commission indicated in its letter to the Greek authorities that it would be sending a
letter each month requesting payment (at the latest two months after receiving each letter) of the sum of
to the Greek authorities on
the fine for the month in question. Two further
9 November 2000 and 4 December 2000 requesting payment of € 620 000 and € 600 000, these being
the sums due for October and November 2000, respectively.

letters were sent

The sum total of the fine due for the months of July to November 2000 is therefore € 2 980 000. The
Greek authorities have so far not replied to the Commission(cid:146)s letters.

2.
In order to comply with the judgment of 4 July 2000, Greece must take the action needed to ensure
that waste is disposed of without endangering human health or harming the environment, adopt a regional
management plan for waste and hazardous waste, close down the illegal waste tip at Kouroupitos and
restore the site. The Greek authorities have so far sent the Commission the regional management plan for
waste and hazardous waste. This document and the information sent by the Greek authorities following
the Court judgment are being examined.

3.
In accordance with Article 228 (ex Article 171) of the Treaty, the Commission may make a referral
to the Court of Justice if it finds that a Member State has failed to take the action needed to comply with a
Court judgment. In doing so, the Commission specifies what it consider to be the appropriate amount of
penalty payment to be paid by the Member State concerned. In its judgment, the Court may impose the
payment of a lump sum or a penalty payment. The penalty payment has to be paid up to the date on
which the Member State takes all the action needed to comply fully with the judgement of the Court of
Justice. If the Member State subsequently infringes Community law, Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the
Treaty applies.

The Commission found that Greece had not adopted measures to transpose Directive 97/11/EC (3)
4.
and referred the matter to the Court of Justice on 11 October 2000 (Case C-2000/374). Furthermore, the
Commission found that Greece had not taken adequate measures to protect the turtle Caretta caretta, in
violation of Article 12 of Directive 92/43/EEC (4), and referred the matter to the Court on 17 March 2000
(Case C-2000/103). In addition, on 28 July 2000 the Commission sent a reasoned opinion to the Greek
Government for infringement of Article 4 of Directive 79/409/EEC (5) concerning the date of closure of the
hunting season. On 1 August 2000, the Commission sent a further reasoned opinion to the Greek
authorities
transposing
Directive 85/337/EEC.

concerning the non-conformity of

implementing measures

the national

C 174 E/184

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

The undersea tunnel project in the Gulf of Maliakos is part of a priority project for the construction

5.
of the Pathe motorway, which will be funded by the Community during the period 2000-2006.

In the framework of its examination of the complaint it has received about this undersea tunnel project in
the Gulf of Maliakos, the Commission is in the process of analysing the documents sent by the Greek
authorities in order to decide what action to take.

6.
If a violation of legislation is confirmed, the project concerned is not eligible for co-financing under
Community funds. The Commission has no obligation or competence to take preventive action to avoid
possible loss of Community funds by Member States following a confirmed violation of Community
legislation.

(1) Case C-387/97.
(2) Decision of 14 December 1994 on the provisions of the internal procedure for recovering lump sums or fines

imposed by the Court of Justice in pursuance of Article 171 of EC Treaty.

(3) Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment.

(4) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.
(5) Council Directive 79/4090/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds.

(2001/C 174 E/195)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3915/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(6 December 2000)

Subject: Implementation of environmental legislation

In her confirmation hearing before the European Parliament(cid:146)s Environment Committee on 2 September
1999, Commissioner (designate) Wallstrom stated:

I believe that we must first and foremost enlist the public(cid:146)s help. With better information, for example,
by publishing reports on how the Member States are dealing with implementation, following up our
decisions in the Commission and the Parliament, and by producing more of these reports I believe
that we can bring the public on board. I think that it is an important point of departure. I am sure
that it is possible to do considerably more in this respect.

1. What new steps has the Commission taken since that date to name and shame Member States and
encourage implementation of environmental legislation in ways which represent (cid:145)an important point of
departure(cid:146)?

2. What additional new procedures does the Commission intend to introduce so as (cid:145)to do considerably
more(cid:146)?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2001)

Among the various actions taken by the Commission to this end, it may be worth mentioning that it
published its 16th Annual Report on monitoring the application of Community law (1) and that it
published Directorate general Environment(cid:146)s second Annual Survey, providing up-to-date information on
the state of application of Community environmental law. This more specific publication comprises five
main parts: continuing follow-up actions to the Commission(cid:146)s communication on implementing Commu-
nity environmental law (2); other specific horizontal actions; the work carried out by IMPEL during the
period covered by the survey and its work programme for 2000; details of Member States(cid:146) transposing
legislation communicated for Community environmental directives to be transposed during the period of
the survey: and a reproduction of the Environment chapter from the Commission(cid:146)s 16th Annual Report on
monitoring the application of Community law. The aim of this second Annual Survey is to continue to
the transposition, application and enforcement of
increase awareness and improve transparency of