WRITTEN QUESTION E-0236/01 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Continuing failure to clarify deaths of inhabitants of Kosovar village of Racak.
Date: 2001-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Kosovo, crime against individuals, judicial inquiry, medical report, the EU's international role

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/69

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(21 March 2001)

The Commission has not received any complaint concerning legal and administrative hurdles making it
difficult for disabled persons to exercise their right to freedom of movement or their freedom to choose
their place of work within the Community.

If the Honourable Member has information about any specific cases, she is invited to forward it to the
to see if any infringement of
Commission. This would enable an investigation to be carried out
Community-law has occurred and, if so, to decide what measures should be taken.

(2001/C 261 E/071)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0236/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Continuing failure to clarify deaths of inhabitants of Kosovar village of Racak

Does the Council recall my Written Question No E-0628/00 (1) of 2 March 2000 on the deaths on
1.
15 January 1999 of 45 men belonging to the Albanian community in the village of Racak in Kosovo, and
its answer of 8 June 2000?

2. Was the full report by the Finnish forensic team of 21 June 2000 handed over to the General
Council and the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY)?

3. What, according to the report, is the exact number of victims, and what were the circumstances of
their deaths?

Is the report in the public domain? If not, why not? Is the Council prepared to make the report

4.
available to Members of the European Parliament?

Has the recommendation made by Dr Helena Ranta in March 1999, that there should first be a

5.
thorough police investigation to give an overall picture of what happened in Racak, been followed up

6.

7.

Has the ICTY now opened a criminal investigation?

Does the Council endorse the findings of the report referred to in paragraph 2 above?

How, when and by whom does the Council expect the complete truth about what happened in

8.
Racak to be conclusively established?

(1) OJ C 26 E, 26.1.2001, p. 72.

Reply

(31 May 2001)

The Council certainly recalls its reply of 8 June 2000 to a previous question on the issue and is ready to
update the Honourable Member on the issue.

At the end of the month of June 2000, the Finnish forensic team completed its work and (cid:129) as agreed with
the Council (cid:129) handed over directly to the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY) a
full and detailed report of its findings. The forensic team has briefed the Council by presenting an
(cid:145)Executive Summary(cid:146) (annex). This document has been recently declassified, following advice by ICTY and
Dr Helena Ranta, who had lead the EU forensic team to Yugoslavia. On the same occasion both Dr Ranta
and the office of ICTY Prosecutor made it clear that due to ongoing investigations, the content of the final
report (cid:129) which is not in the hands of the Council (cid:129) should not be disclosed.

C 261 E/70

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

The Council agrees with these views and does not see fit to comment further.

As for the last question of the Honourable Member,
it is clear that the complete truth about what
happened in Racak will be established, by ICTY, after careful investigation and on the basis of all elements
including the forensic expert(cid:146)s report. Only ICTY can judge the circumstances of and
at its disposal,
responsibility for this atrocious episode of recent European history.

(2001/C 261 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0238/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 February 2001)

Subject: Exotic animal species: closure of Netherlands borders to imports from outside Europe

1.
Is the Commission aware of the growing demand for monkeys, large parrots, song birds, iguanas,
tortoises, snakes and salt-water fishes from outside Europe by persons intending to keep such animals as
household pets?

2.
Is the Commission aware that the KLM airline has refused, since the shredding of 440 striped
Chinese squirrels in 1999, to transport any more exotic species, and that this is one of the reasons why the
(cid:145)Aeroground Services(cid:146) firm based at Schiphol airport went out of business on 1 January 2001.

3.
Is the Commission further aware that the Netherlands government department responsible for testing
livestock and meat products ceased, as of 2001, to monitor animal welfare and the spread of diseases, but
is responsible for the temporary reception of animals and their return to a destination outside the
European Union at the importers(cid:146) expense?

4.
Is it true, as claimed by the Netherlands (cid:145)Dibevo(cid:146) animal trading organisation that European rules
require Member States each to operate at least one testing centre for their home territory, and does the
Netherlands no longer comply with that requirement now that intercontinental access via Schiphol has
been discontinued, although the external-boundary inspection centre at the Maastricht-Aachen regional
airport is being maintained?

5.
Has the Commission now received a request from the Netherlands government for a procedure to be
initiated withdrawing recognition of Schiphol as an external-boundary inspection centre for the purpose of
importing exotic species?

(2001/C 261 E/073)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0239/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 February 2001)

Subject: Exotic animal species: inadvertent increase in transport time and higher death rate

1.
Is the Commission familiar with reports to the effect that action by the Netherlands government
aimed at saving exotic animals from poor survival prospects during transportation and intolerable living
conditions thereafter can easily be evaded because no customs inspections are carried out at internal
borders?

2.
How does the Commission assess the report than Netherlands animal dealers are now importing
exotic species through the Brussels and Frankfurt airports and then further transporting them over land,
with the result that the animals have to be overloaded, the journey now takes twice as long, and many
more animals are dying during transportation than hitherto?