WRITTEN QUESTION E-3950/00 by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Introduction of the euro in the Yugoslav Republic of Montenegro.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Kosovo, Montenegro, accession to the European Union, convergence criteria, economic offence, economic stabilisation, euro, national currency

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/37

Reply

(7 May 2001)

the European year of

to which the
The measures undertaken in the context of
Honourable Parliamentarian refers, according to article 1 of the decision (1) establishing it, (cid:145)will cover the
official languages of the Community, together with Irish, Letzerburgesch, and other languages in line with
those identified by the Member States for the purposes of implementing this Decision.(cid:146) While fully
acknowledging the richness of the linguistic diversity of the Community (including the Catalan language),
the Council considers, as is clear from the above as well as in the formulation of Article 149 of the
EC Treaty and indeed in the principle of subsidiarity in general, that the responsibility for that cultural and
linguistic diversity lies with the Member States.

languages 2001,

(1) Decision No 1934/2000/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 on the European Year

of Languages 2001 (OJ L 232, 14.2.2000, p. 1).

(2001/C 235 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3950/00

by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Introduction of the euro in the Yugoslav Republic of Montenegro

1.
Is the Council aware whether and, if so, how and by what specific means and to what extent the
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Bundesbank have supported and
promoted the introduction of the Deutschmark in the Yugoslav Republic of Montenegro?

2. What is the Council(cid:146)s view of the declared intention of the Government of the Yugoslav Republic of
Montenegro of introducing the euro as its sole currency with effect from 1 January 2002?

3.
Does the Council believe that the Yugoslav Republic of Montenegro currently fulfils, or can fulfil by
1 January 2002, the stability criteria for membership of the single currency set out in the Treaties (in
particular, in Article 121 of the EU Treaty and Protocols 11 and 12 to the Amsterdam Treaty)?

4. What specific action to prevent the introduction of the euro in Montenegro will be taken by the
Council, in the light of section III.3 of the Commission(cid:146)s most recent strategy paper on enlargement, which
states that the introduction of the euro in new Member States (as in the case of the original Euro-zone
participants) will only be decided when it has been ascertained, in accordance with Article 121 of the EU
Treaty, whether a high degree of sustainable convergence has been achieved?

5.
Does the Council know whether the euro is also to be introduced in the Yugoslav region of Kosovo
from 2002 and, if so, does Kosovo, in the opinion of the Council, fulfil the stability criteria enshrined in
the EU Treaty and applying to all States participating, or wishing to participate, in the single currency?

6. What specific action does the Council propose taking in order to prevent the introduction of the
euro in Kosovo if the latter does not achieve the stability criteria for membership of the euro by 2002?

How does the Council view the introduction of the Deutschmark in Montenegro and Kosovo in the
the Federal Republic of

7.
light of UN Resolution 1244, which establishes the territorial
Yugoslavia?

integrity of

8. What are the consequences, in the view of the Council, of the fact that 33 % of all Deutschmark
notes and coins are in circulation abroad, and what are the consequences as regards the resistance of the
euro to forgery?

C 235 E/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

Reply

(7 May 2001)

On 7 November 2000 the Ecofin Council examined the exchange rate policy to be pursued by candidate
countries for accession in preparation for their subsequent adoption of the euro and adopted conclusions
on the subject. In the conclusions the Council pointed out that, following accession, the new Member
States would not be able to adopt the euro immediately: they would first have to satisfy all the relevant
requirements of the Treaty, in particular the convergence criteria.

The Council also pointed out that any unilateral adoption of the single currency by (cid:145)euroisation(cid:146) would
conflict with the economic considerations underlying economic and monetary union in the Treaty and
that, consequently, unilateral (cid:145)euroisation(cid:146) was not a means of by-passing the stages laid down in the Treaty
for adoption of the euro.

The same holds true for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in so far as it is a potential candidate for
accession to the European Union in accordance with the conclusions of the Cologne, Feira and Nice
European Councils.

The Council has not looked into the issues raised by the Honourable Member in the eighth paragraph of
her question. However, the European Council in Nice invited the Council to adopt effective measures to
protect the euro against counterfeiting as soon as possible in 2001 and the Council is pressing ahead with
work on this matter, on the basis of a Commission proposal.

(2001/C 235 E/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3955/00

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

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Hungarian minority in Slovakia

According to the 1997 Commission opinion on Slovakia(cid:146)s application for membership of the EU, the
Hungarian minority represents 11 % of the population. The latest Commission report (1) devotes no more
than two lines to this minority.

Does the Commission take the view that the rights of the Hungarian minority in Slovakia are not being
curtailed by the Beres decrees, which remain in force? What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of the fact that one
of the conditions laid down for the entry into government of the Hungarian Coalition Party was that the
1945 decrees are not to be revised? What impact will implementation of the basic treaty with Hungary
have on this minority?

(1) COM(2000) 711.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2001)

The Commission closely monitors the fulfillment of the criteria established by the Copenhagen European
Council in 1993 in all candidate countries including Slovakia. The political criterion encompasses the
protection of minorities including the Hungarian minority.

As regards the Benes decrees, the Commission is fully aware of the human dimension and complexity of
this issue. However,
the Benes decrees were adopted and implemented before the founding of the
European Community and before the entry into force of the Treaty of Rome. In so far as their legal
impact nowadays relates to restitution issues, the Commission does not have the competence to intervene,
neither in a current nor a future Member State, since article 295 (ex Article 222) of the EC Treaty
explicitly states that the Treaty shall in no way prejudice the rules in the Member States governing the
system of property ownership. The Commission underlines, however, that candidate countries have to
comply, at the time of their accession to the EU, with the acquis communautaire, including the principles
of free movement of persons and freedom of establishment as well as the protection of human rights and
minority rights.