WRITTEN QUESTION E-4135/00 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Laying Hens Directive (1999/74/EC).
Date: 2001-01-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, animal welfare, intensive livestock farming, laying poultry, protection of animals, veterinary legislation

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/25

The European Investment Bank (EIB) has informed the Commission that it is committed to the Community
objective of transparency, taking into account the conditions determined by the Bank(cid:146)s particular nature
and specific mission. It aims to keep its information policy in step with evolving best practice in the
banking sector and to disclose information to the maximum extent possible. In doing so, the EIB will take
into account the general spirit of the Aarhus Convention and of any other relevant international legal
instrument. This is without prejudice to any future obligations, which may derive from the Community
legislative process.

(1) COM(2000) 30 final (OJ C 177 E, 27.6.2000).

(2001/C 261 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4111/00

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(16 January 2001)

Subject: Hunger strike by Turkish prisoners

For more than fifty days hundreds of prisoners have been on hunger strike in 18 prisons in Turkey: they
are protesting about the decision by the authorities to transfer them to new F-type prisons with smaller
cells, since this deprives them of basic rights, such as the right to communicate and the possibility of
giving each other moral support.

In view of this, will the Council say how a country seeking accession to the European Union can violate
prisoners(cid:146) rights in such brutal manner and endanger their lives, and whether behaviour such as that of the
Turkish authorities is in keeping with the partnership agreement concluded recently between the EU and
Turkey?

Reply

(30 May 2001)

The Turkish Government is well aware of the EU(cid:146)s strong views on the need to improve the situation in
Turkish prisons. Indeed, the Council has included this issue in the medium-term priorities of the Accession
Partnership:
(cid:145)adjust detention conditions in prisons to bring them into line with the UN Standard
Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and other international norms(cid:146). Moreover, Turkey has
the Acquis, which indicates Turkey(cid:146)s
recently adopted a National Programme for the Adoption of
intentions with regard to the Accession Partnership.

In bilateral meetings with Turkey, the European Union has registered its concern about the police methods
deemed necessary by the Turkish authorities in December of last year to deal with the hunger strikes and
the unrest in Turkish prisons, such practices not being required for the introduction of the reforms
provided for in the Accession Partnership. The Council welcomes the intention of the Turkish authorities
to continue to cooperate with the Council of Europe in this respect, in particular with its Committee for
the Prevention of Torture. The Council will continue to monitor the situation.

(2001/C 261 E/025)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4135/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 January 2001)

Subject: Laying Hens Directive (1999/74/EC)

Is the Commission aware that some animal welfare organisations are concerned that so-called enriched
cages are not included in the cage ban under the Laying Hens Directive (1999/74/EC) (1)?

C 261 E/26

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

Is the Commission concerned that the exclusion of enriched cages from the Directive could represent a
(cid:145)loophole(cid:146) as farmers might adapt existing battery cages to render them legal after the ban on battery cages
enters into force in 2012?

(1) OJ L 203, 3.8.1999, p. 53.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2001)

The Commission is aware that some animal welfare organisations in the Community are concerned that
the ban on cages under the Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999,
laying down minimum
standards for the protection of laying hens, is limited to unenriched cage systems.

The Directive reflects the conclusions of a specific opinion of the Scientific Veterinary Committee. This
opinion, adopted in 1996, highlights that the welfare conditions of hens kept in battery cages without any
enrichment are inadequate. The enrichment of the cages provided in 1999 is supposed to compensate for
certain disadvantages for the welfare of the hens.

According to Article 10 of the Directive the Commission shall submit a report to the Council not later
than 1 January 2005, drawn up on the basis of an opinion from the Scientific Veterinary Committee, on
the various systems of rearing laying hens. One of the objectives of this report will be to evaluate enriched
cages, which are still under development and which are not yet widely used in commercial farms.

The Directive does not exclude the transformation of existing battery cages into enriched cages. As long as
the minimum standards for the enriched cages laid down in the Directive are fulfilled this could not be
regarded as a circumvention of the ban.

(2001/C 261 E/026)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4154/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(16 January 2001)

Subject: Protecting political prisoners in Turkey against hatred, arbitrary treatment and circumstances

which may result in death

1.
Is the Council aware of the hunger strike by more than 800 prisoners in Turkey which has been
going on since 20 October, and of the support for this hunger strike in the form of solidarity campaigns
and hunger strikes in the Member States of the European Union?

2.
Does the Council agree that at first sight it seems rather strange that within the countries of the
European Union prisoners mostly wish their privacy to be respected and not more than one person to be
accommodated in each cell, whereas prisoners in Turkey are protesting against a (cid:145)modernisation(cid:146) of the
prison system which will result in their being moved from dormitory-style wards to individual cells in
newly built or planned F-type prisons?

3.
Does the Council appreciate that the position of people who are imprisoned for (cid:145)political offences(cid:146)
which would not generally have resulted in a prison sentence in Member States of the European Union
and who therefore see themselves as political prisoners is different from that of individual convicts who
have committed crimes, partly because they fear that solitary confinement will expose them to the risk of
uncontrollable intimidation and mistreatment, while medical treatment may not be available to them,
because they are hated by their guards and by the authorities concerned?

4. What will the Council do through the contacts with Turkey, an applicant for membership of the
European Union, in order to reduce to a minimum the number of political prisoners in that country and
(cid:129) in the case of those who are nonetheless incarcerated (cid:129) to secure a special status for them, which is
subject to international monitoring, such as to protect them in so far as possible against hatred, arbitrary
treatment and circumstances which may lead to their death?