WRITTEN QUESTION E-3982/00 by Carlos Carnero González (PSE) to the Commission. Advisability of exploratory talks between the Commission and the UN representative for Equatorial Guinea.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Equatorial Guinea, UNO, diplomatic representation, exchange of information, human rights

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/99

(cid:129) establishing a framework for organising annual programmes for controls of feed and food,

(cid:129) merging existing rules on mutual assistance and administrative co-operation.

It is also intended to integrate within this proposal the operational criteria for authorities that are in charge
of performing official controls. This proposal will therefore improve on existing Directives, by defining the
qualifications of feed and food controlling authorities.

On drinking water, the 1998 Drinking Water Directive (6) sets quality standards for drinking water and for
requirements for monitoring, as well as requirements for the analytical quality control. Of particular
importance in the context raised are the provisions on analytical quality control. Laboratories at which
samples are analysed have to have a system of analytical quality control to be checked by a certified person
or institution approved by the responsible authority for that purpose. Member States have the binding and
enforceable obligation to implement these provisions, whilst at the same time they have the choice as
regards the organisation (central, regional or local approach). As a conclusion the Directive sets the targets
to be achieved, but leaves the way to achieve these to Member States.

On bathing water, the 1976 Bathing Water Directive (7) has achieved considerable improvements in the
quality of bathing waters. However,
it is now outdated both as regards science and technology and
managerial approach. Inter alia, provisions on sampling and quality assurance are vague.

Consequently the Commission has started a thorough review process along the same lines as the recently
adopted Water Framework Directive (8),
i.e. Communication (cid:129) Consultation with stakeholders (cid:129) Con-
ference (cid:129) Legislative Proposal. As a first step, the Commission has adopted on 21 December 2000
a Communication to Parliament and Council (cid:145)Developing a New Bathing Water Policy(cid:146) (9).

Principal elements of a new Directive will be legally binding quality values aiming at a high level of
protection, coherence with the new Water Framework Directive,
information and participation of the
public, as well as quality management and quality assurance supporting those objectives.

(1) OJ L 186, 30.6.1989.
(2) OJ L 290, 24.11.1993.
(3) OJ L 362, 23.12.1978.
(4) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989 and OJ L 209 of 24.7.1992.
(5) COM(1999) 719 final.
(6) Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3.11.1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ L 330,

5.12.1998).

(7) Council Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 concerning the quality of bathing water (OJ L 31, 5.2.1976).
(8) Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23.10.2000 establishing a framework for Community

action in the field of water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000).

(9) COM(2000) 860 final.

(2001/C 187 E/106)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3982/00

by Carlos Carnero GonzÆlez (PSE) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Advisability of exploratory talks between the Commission and the UN representative for Equatorial

Guinea

On 23 November last I met Mr Gustavo Gall(cid:243)n Giraldo, the UN representative for Equatorial Guinea, in
Madrid.

Unlikely as it may sound, Mr Giraldo was in Madrid because the government of Equatorial Guinea had not
authorised him to visit the country in order to carry out his duties.

C 187 E/100

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

The UN representative is drawing up his forthcoming report on the situation in Equatorial Guinea in
preparation for the meeting of the UN Human Rights Commission in the spring.

Does the Commission not think that it would be advisable to have official, regular contact with the UN
representative for Equatorial Guinea?

Does such contact already exist? If not, is it to be established in the future?

Does the Commission believe that an exchange of information and views on the situation of democratic
principles and human rights in Equatorial Guinea could usefully be held with Mr Giraldo?

Would it not be appropriate to extend a formal invitation to him to visit Brussels to supplement the EU(cid:146)s
impressions following the meeting between Romano Prodi and Teodoro Obiang?

Does the Commission intend to ask Malabo to explain why the UN representative was denied authorisation
to enter the country?

Is the report of the EU mission which has visited Equatorial Guinea in the autumn already available?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2001)

The Commission already has regular contacts with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights, which acts as the secretariat for the Special Representative of the UN Commission on Human
Rights for Equatorial Guinea, Gustavo Gallon Giraldo. This dialogue provides an opportunity for the
exchange of information.

The Commission shares and supports the position and views of the UN Human Rights Commission and
the Special Representative for Equatorial Guinea. The Commission has strongly urged the government of
Equatorial Guinea to commit itself to following the recommendations made.

The press release issued after the meeting between the President of the Commission and President Obiang
expressly states that an assessment of the situation in Equatorial Guinea would be carried out in a year(cid:146)s
time and the participation of the Special Representative of the United Nations Commission on Human
Rights and Special Rapporteurs had been requested.

All information in the Commission(cid:146)s possession has already been forwarded to the Special Representative,
and a written answer has been given to his letter of 2 October 2000 concerning the Commission(cid:146)s human
rights activities in Equatorial Guinea.

The Commission underlined the importance of the mission of the Special Representative and other
Rapporteurs in its letter to the President of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea of 14 September 2000.

On learning that the government of Equatorial Guinea had not renewed its invitation to the Special
Representative to visit the country in 2000, the Commission sent the Embassy of Equatorial Guinea
a further letter on 15 December 2000 expressing its concern.

Reports on the three components of the joint Community-Interparliamentary Union mission of September/
October 2000 are available. However the summary report which will form the basis for a financing
proposal has not yet been finalised.