WRITTEN QUESTION E-0165/01 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) and Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Notification under the Habitats Directive.
Date: 2001-01-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, access to EU information, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, protected area

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/197

(2001/C 187 E/212)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0165/01

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) and Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Notification under the Habitats Directive

(31 January 2001)

implementing projects of social
The Habitats Directive affords Member States the opportunity of
importance if they clash with ecological provisions. Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC (1) says:
(cid:145)If, in
spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions,
a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest,
including those of a social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures
necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It shall inform the Commission
of the compensatory measures adopted(cid:146).

Can the Commission provide a full and detailed breakdown of such information it has received since the
entry into force of the Habitats Directive?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2001)

Since the entry into force of the Habitats Directive, Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, on 5 June 1994, the Commission has issued,
upon request of the Member States, two opinions related to the application of article 6.4(2).

These opinions concerned the following cases in Germany:

(cid:129) Crossing of the SPA/pSCI(cid:146)s (cid:145)Naturschutzgebiet Mecklenburgische Schweiz, Recknitz- und Trebeltal(cid:146) and
(cid:145)Peenetal vom Kummerower See bis Schadefaehre(cid:146) by the contruction of the A20 motorway in the
Land of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. This case was the subject of complaint procedures 94/4764 and
97/4967. The Commission published opinion 96/15/EC of 18 December 1995 on the case (1).

(cid:129) Extension of the DASA aircraft factory into the SPA/pSCI (cid:145)Muehlenberger Loch(cid:146), Hamburg. The project
foresaw that the (cid:145)Muehlenberger Loch(cid:146), a shallow lagoon under tidal
influence, would be partly
destroyed by a landfill necessary for the industrial extension. The case was the subject of complaint
procedure 96/4181, to which seven other complaint files were attached. The Commission delivered its
opinion on the case on 19 April 2000, of which a copy is sent to the Honourable Member and the
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

The Commission has received several notifications from Member States about activities at locations that
were not (yet) designated as Natura 2000 sites. The Comission has not issued any formal reaction to these
notifications, given the fact that designation of the sites should be the first step in the application of
Article 6 of the Habitats Directive.

(1) OJ L 6, 9.1.1996.

(2001/C 187 E/213)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0167/01

by Ioannis Mar(cid:237)nos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Moves by Turkey to press ahead with the annexation of the occupied part of Cyprus

On 13 December 2000 Mr Panikos Tsiakourmas, a citizen of the Republic of Cyprus, was seized by the
(cid:145)authorities(cid:146) of the puppet state of northern Cyprus while he was on the territory of the British bases on