WRITTEN QUESTION E-4072/00 by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Deficiencies at the Joint Research Centre in respect of the handling of nuclear materials.
Date: 2001-01-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Joint Research Centre, approval, fact-finding mission, nuclear safety, radioactive materials, report, storage

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/55

Does the Council agree that democratic decision-making cannot take place without the interest and
3.
involvement of citizens, who must have the opportunity to express their opinions openly in this
connection?

4. What is the Council(cid:146)s opinion of the relegation of residents of other Member States than the one in
which the meeting takes place to the status of second-class citizens in terms of their right to express their
views in situ by reason of the fact that they must first cross one of the EU(cid:146)s internal borders?

Are the internal borders of

5.
demonstrators?

the European Union open for goods and services but not

for

6.
Can the Council guarantee that this is the last time such restrictions will be imposed on the
participation of interested residents of EU Member States in the democratic process of public preparation
for decision-making?

Reply

(7 May 2001)

The Council would draw the Honourable Member(cid:146)s attention to Article 2(2) of the Schengen Convention,
which gives Member States the option of restoring national border checks on persons at internal borders
for a limited period if public policy or national security require immediate action.

The Council would also point out that the free movement of persons provided for by the Treaty
establishing the European Community (TEC) and the exercise of the fundamental rights guaranteed by
the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) may be subject to limitations in certain cases (see
Article 64(1) of the TEC and Articles 10(2) and 11(2) of the ECHR).

Pursuant to Decision SCH/Comex (95) 20 rev 2 of 20 December 1995 of the Executive Committee set up
by the Schengen Convention, which has been incorporated into the European Union Framework, the
French Government notified the Council of its decision to restore checks at the border between France and
Italy from 2 to 10 December 2000.

In any case, the Council would remind the Honourable Member that responsibility for maintaining law and
order and safeguarding the internal security of the Member States of the Union rests with each individual
Member State(cid:146)s authorities. It is not for the Council to state a position on an issue which does not fall
within its sphere of competence.

(2001/C 235 E/060)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4072/00

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 January 2001)

Subject: Deficiencies at the Joint Research Centre in respect of the handling of nuclear materials

Paragraph 1(j) of the European Parliament resolution of 13 April 2000 on the discharge for 1998 called
on the Commission to launch (cid:145)a formal administrative investigation to ascertain responsibilities in
connection with the withheld warning of serious deficiencies at the Joint Research Centre (particularly
with the handling of nuclear materials)(cid:146).

Can the Commission provide me with a copy of the report of the investigation?

Can the Commission state what steps it has taken on the basis of that report?

C 235 E/56

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2001)

In the wake of Parliament(cid:146)s resolution of 13 April 2000 deferring the discharge, the Commission launched
an administrative investigation into the matter. It emerged from that investigation that no irregularity had
been committed and thus no administrative or disciplinary proceedings were instituted. More specifically it
emerged from that investigation that there had been no deliberate withholding of information when the
performance audit carried out by the financial control DG on the activities of the Joint Research Centre
(JRC) was processed.

It goes without saying that, as regards the basic matter of safety when handling nuclear materials at the
JRC, the necessary operational action was taken in order to tighten up compliance with the rules in this
area and improve the monitoring of their implementation by, for example:

Recruiting a second expert qualified in radiation protection (selection procedure concluded in late 2000)
and creating a position of a port for an official in charge of transporting fissile and radioactive materials
(April 2000).

Redefining specific supervised areas for the storage of fissile and radioactive materials (completed in late
1999).

Closing down nuclear laboratories in order to reduce the number of operating licences and the
accompanying potential risks (completed in 2000).

Extending the staff training programme (begun in April 2000).

Moreover, the JRC has set up a standing committee on these matters, whose task is to monitor any
changes made to European and Member-State regulations on this matter and to ensure that the safety rules
applying at the JRC(cid:146)s various sites comply.

Since the administrative investigation was expedited under the 1998 discharge the investigation report and
the information on the conclusions drawn can be passed on under the provisions of Article 276 (formerly
Article 206) of the EC Treaty, while maintaining confidentiality. Indeed, that report contains aspects that
are likely to affect individual rights.

(2001/C 235 E/061)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4073/00

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: The (cid:145)mysterious lawyer(cid:146) who worked for Mrs Cresson

(10 January 2001)

On 25 May 2000 the German magazine (cid:145)Der Stern(cid:146) printed a report headed (cid:145)The mysterious lawyer(cid:146),
referring to a Mr Timm Riedinger. Riedinger is supposed to have been in the service of
former
Commissioner for Research Edith Cresson and to have processed Commission projects on her behalf.
According to the report, the Commission could not at the time find any trace of Mr Riedlinger in its
records.

What steps has the Commission taken in the meantime to establish whether Mr Riedinger was in fact
entrusted by Mrs Cresson with the processing of Commission projects?

Will the Commission also state:

(a) which projects were involved?

(b) how and by whom Mr Riedinger was paid for his services?

(c) whether his activities on behalf of the Commission were compatible with Article 213 of the EC Treaty
the Commission to be completely

and in particular the provision requiring the Members of
independent in the performance of their duties?

(d) whether it intends to start proceedings against Mrs Cresson before the Court of Justice for breach of

her obligations?