WRITTEN QUESTION E-0187/01 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Common foreign policy on Kosovo.
Date: 2001-02-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Serbia and Montenegro, barring of penalties by limitation, political prisoner, the EU's international role

C 261 E/58

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

Reply

(31 May 2001)

The report referred to in the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question has never been submitted to the attention of
the Council. Therefore its content has not been discussed.

The health of national troops that Member States may commit to EU-led crisis management operations
will certainly be a concern in the Council when deliberating on crisis management. During its discussions
on the occasion of its 22 January 2001 meeting, the Council acknowledged the great concern of the public
opinion and expressed their commitment to seek full clarity on the issue of depleted uranium, calling, in
line with article 16 of the Treaty for full transparency and open exchange of information between the
authorities of the Member States, as well as with other organisations investigating this matter.

There was general agreement however that in the first instance it was for NATO, as the institution
organising crisis management in Balkans, to assemble the information from participants on the use of
depleted uranium, on the locations of troops and on medical data.

The Council also noted that several bodies (UNEP, WHO, NATO,
the committee set up by the
Commission) were examining this issue. Conclusions of the report from the Expert Group of article 31 of
Euratom Treaty, were issued on 6th March 2001. Other reports are expected to be published shortly. Once
these reports are available, the Council has agreed to re-examine this issue in order to assess whether any
specific initiative or measures at EU level are warranted.

In accordance with Article 21 of the Treaty, the European Parliament is regularly kept informed of the
development of the Union(cid:146)s foreign and security policy. It will certainly be informed of the findings of
these inquiries and the possible follow-up.

(2001/C 261 E/060)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0187/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(5 February 2001)

Subject: Common foreign policy on Kosovo

The Parliament of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia very recently adopted an Amnesty Law for those who
refused to serve in the Yugoslav People(cid:146)s Army and for prisoners convicted of crimes against the army or
of (cid:145)activities hostile to the State(cid:146). According to statements by Yugoslavia(cid:146)s Minister of Justice, Moncilo
Grubac, on 9 January 2001, this law does not apply to those convicted of terrorism. This means that the
amnesty does not extend to some 700 Albanian Kosovar prisoners in Serbia because they were convicted
of (cid:145)terrorism(cid:146). This is despite the recent undertaking given by Yugoslavia(cid:146)s Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Goran Svilanovic, in Washington that Albanian prisoners would be released, and despite similar promises
made by President Kostunica to the EU among others.

1.

Is the Council considering expressing its disapproval of these developments? If not, why not?

2. What measures will the Council take to put pressure on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to fulfil
the official pledges concerning the release of all Albanian political prisoners?

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/59

Reply

(31 May 2001)

The Council remains seriously concerned about the political prisoners detained in Serbia, including the
approximately 700 Kosovo Albanians referred to by the Honourable Member, and has repeatedly pressed
the competent authorities for their release.

The Yugoslav Federal Government submitted to Parliament on 22 January a draft amnesty law, which is
presently under discussion. Its adoption is expected by the end of the month of February. The draft law
covers political prisoners, including part of the 700 Kosovo Albanians referred to by the Honourable
Member.

In the EU(cid:146)s view the initiative undertaken by the new Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) leadership,
while welcome, did not go far enough. Therefore, the European Union has been exercising strong pressure
on Belgrade, not least directly on President Kostunica during the recent visit of the EU Ministerial Troika
on 8 February. On that occasion, and during a previous visit to Stockholm, President Kostunica assured his
EU interlocutors that all the cases of those prisoners not covered by the amnesty law would be reviewed,
indicating, however, that this process could take two to three months. The European Union will certainly
continue to give this issue high priority in its relations with the authorities of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia.

(2001/C 261 E/061)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0190/01

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 January 2001)

Subject: European Court judgment against Ireland of 21 September 1999 (cid:129) Case C-392/96

Would the Commission assure this Member of the European Parliament that the proposals put forward by
the Irish authorities in response to the European Court judgment of 22 September 1999 will specifically
ensure that appropriate testing will take place before any further consent is given for afforestation or
reforestation in those areas of Ireland identified as acid-sensitive?

Extensive areas, particularly in the west and north-west, are characterised by rain-fed peat soils with high
concentrations of organic acids where the geology is unable to absorb the effects of the increasing acid
levels from afforestation. Other areas, particularly in the east, where catchments are dominated by quartz-
bearing bedrock, with a shallow, carbonate-free soil overburden, areas with sandy, siliceous soils, and
highly-weathered old leached soils are also vulnerable. Extensive Irish research over the last ten years has
demonstrated that the acidification in these catchments promotes dissolved organic matter and dissolved
aluminium which can occur in a toxic form, leading to a coating of mucus on the gills and extensive
mortality.

The streams most severely affected by afforestation in these areas lack acid-sensitive invertebrates and are
too acid to support self-sustaining populations of salmonoids, particularly as the research demonstrates
that acid episodes tend to occur in winter and spring, a particularly vulnerable period in the salmonoid
life-cycle. Sites with the most acid waters showed the lowest survival of salmon ova, and eggs developed
abnormally brittle shells during incubation. Mayflies are absent from most acid sites in forests and these
sites hold a lower diversity of invertebrates. Fish are entirely absent from sites otherwise suitable. All of
this has been demonstrated by Irish research and subject to repeated per-group review, yet afforestation