WRITTEN QUESTION P-0203/01 by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Access to confidential information pursuant to Article 197(3) of the Treaty.
Date: 2001-01-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, Statute for Members of the Parliament, access to EU information, confidentiality, discretionary power, interinstitutional relations (EU), judgment of the Court (EU)

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/155

The Commission would only proceed against Member States under Article 226 (ex Article
7. and 8.
169) of the EC Treaty on the basis that there is evidence of a breach of the obligations of the Directive. As
with all legal proceedings, the Commission bears the burden of proof. The fact that Member States are not
systematically checking every incoming vessel from the United States and Canada is not a breach of Article
4(3) of the Directive.

9.
The Commission did follow up the complaints from Greenpeace with the German, Spanish and
Dutch Governments. With regard to imports into La Coruna, Tarragona and Rotterdam, the Commission
found that there was no evidence on the basis of which to start infringement action against the Spanish
and Dutch authorities. With regard to the imports into Rotterdam where Greenpeace presented evidence of
alleged irregularities with regard to a specific cargo, the Dutch authorities carried out their own inspection
of the cargo concerned but found no unauthorised viable GMOs to be present. The Dutch authorities
informed the Commission that it is their policy to inspect and test cargoes where complaints are received
or irregularities may be suspected. The situation with regard to imports into Hamburg is still being
investigated.

With regard to the situation in Baden-W(cid:252)rttemberg, the Commission received preliminary information
from the German authorities that this involved mainly approved varieties at a low level below 1 %.
However, the case is still being assessed.

(2001/C 235 E/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0203/01

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 January 2001)

Subject: Access to confidential information pursuant to Article 197(3) of the Treaty

In his decision of 15 January 2001 in case T-236/00 the President of the Court of First instance of the
European Communities expressly stated in paragraph 49 that Members of the European Parliament have
the right, as individuals, to table questions to the Commission and to receive from it answers which may
involve the forwarding of confidential information.

However, in recent months the Commission has repeatedly refused, on the grounds of confidentiality of
information, to answer questions or to forward documents.

1.
Is the Commission now prepared to forward copies of the documents I requested in my letter of
13 April 2000/No 202497 to Mrs Schreyer (Echo affair. UCLAF reports of 19 December 1997 and 18 May
1998, Lowe report; Pappas/Timmermans report; Med affair: minutes of proceedings and questions on the
report of 12 January 1998)?

Is the Commission prepared to provide straightforward answers to the individual points in my
2.
Written Questions E-3240/00, E-3241/00 and P-3478/00 in connection with fraud involving adulterated
butter, without using the pretext of confidentiality, as it did in the answers provided in December 2000?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2001)

In the order he made on 15 January 2001 in Case T-236/00 R Gabriele Stauner and Others v. European
Parliament and Commission, the President of the Court of First Instance ruled at paragraph 49:

The fact that the Framework Agreement lays down that certain information may be forwarded only to
the parliamentary authorities referred to in point 1.4 of Annex III to the Agreement, that is, the
President of the European Parliament, the chairpersons of the parliamentary committees concerned,
the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents, does not deprive Members of Parliament, acting in an
individual capacity, of their right to put questions to the Commission and to obtain answers that may
in certain cases involve the forwarding of confidential
information, as was the case before the
Agreement was concluded. It should be borne in mind that the Agreement does not affect, even

C 235 E/156

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

indirectly, the Commission(cid:146)s discretion in deciding to disclose confidential information in its answer to
a question put to it by a Member of Parliament acting in an individual capacity under the third
paragraph of Article 197 of the EC Treaty and the relevant Rules of Procedure of the European
Parliament.

That paragraph must be viewed in conjunction with paragraphs 50 and 51, which read as follows:

On the other hand, if the request for confidential information is put by Parliament, that is, by one of
the parliamentary authorities referred to in point 1.4 of Annex III to the Framework Agreement, the
transmission of that information by the Commission is governed by the Agreement.

It follows that the Framework Agreement, which governs only relations between Parliament and the
Commission, has not prima facie altered the legal position of Members of Parliament acting in an
individual capacity regarding their right under the third paragraph of Article 197 of the EC Treaty,
does not affect the right conferred by that article and therefore has no legal effect on Members acting
in an individual capacity.

Accordingly, the President of the Court of First Instance points out that the Framework Agreement, which
was approved by Parliament on 5 July 2000, does not alter the Commission(cid:146)s procedure for dealing with
questions put to it by Members of Parliament acting under Article 197 of the EC Treaty. He further
indicates that the Commission enjoys a discretion in deciding whether to communicate confidential
information in an answer to a question put under Article 197 of the EC Treaty.

In view of the decision of the President of the Court of First Instance, the Commission considers it
unnecessary for it to review the answers it gave to the questions put by the Honourable Member.

(2001/C 235 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0218/01

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(5 February 2001)

Subject: Chiropractic healthcare provision in the EU

Would the Commission provide information and data on the legal status of chiropractic healthcare in the
Member States of the EU?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(4 April 2001)

The legal provisions governing chiropractic healthcare vary from one Member State to another.
In
a significant number, the activities in question are exclusively reserved for doctors whereas, in others,
this form of healthcare is provided by suitably qualified professionals.

The Commission has no general information on the current legal status of chiropractic healthcare in the
Member States, but would refer the Honourable Member to the Resolution on the status of non-
conventional medicine adopted by Parliament at its sitting of 29 May 1997 (1), which outlines the situation
at that time.

Nevertheless, since certain changes have been, or are being, introduced, the Honourable Member may wish
to contact the relevant European association of qualified professionals not holding a diploma in medicine
(the address will be sent directly both to the Honourable Member and Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat-General).

(1) Doc. A4-0075/97.