WRITTEN QUESTION E-0835/01 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Organised environmental crime in European countries.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, environmental offence, environmental protection, groundwater, hazardous waste, organised crime, unauthorised dumping, waste management, water treatment

C 318 E/130

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2001)

Article 12 (formerly Article 6) of the EC Treaty prohibits any discrimination on grounds of nationality and
thus precludes any administrative or criminal penalties which national authorities may impose on nationals
of the Member States in a discriminatory, unjustified or non-proportional manner. In its judgment of
23 January 1997 in Case C-29/95 Pastoors v. Belgian State, the Court of Justice found that, in the absence
of a convention to ensure the enforcement of court decisions in criminal matters between Member States,
a Member State may require non-residents to lodge a deposit where, in the event of an offence, they opt
for continuation of normal criminal proceedings against them rather than for immediate payment of a fine.
However, the same judgment states that under the said Article 12 the deposit may not be higher than the
amount provided for in the event of immediate payment.

On the basis of the above case-law, a difference in the treatment of residents and non-residents is
objectively justified since there is a real risk that it may be impossible, or at the least considerably more
difficult and costly, to enforce the imposition of a fine on a non-resident.

The Commission intends to analyse the Belgian legislation in detail in the light of the above case-law
before taking a position on whether it is compatible with Community law. Following complaints, the
Commission has scrutinised the legislation of some Member States where the system of penalties for road
traffic offences involves different treatment of residents and non-residents. Infringement proceedings were
initiated against Italy in respect of Italian legislation in this area, and the matter was referred to the Court
of Justice in May 2000.

At present, there is no instrument in force at European level to ensure that criminal penalties imposed in
one Member State are enforced in the other Member States. As part of cooperation under Schengen, an
agreement was adopted on cooperation in proceedings for road traffic offences and the enforcement of
financial penalties imposed in respect thereof (1). However, this agreement did not enter into force and has
since been incorporated into the Union framework along with the rest of the Schengen (cid:145)acquis(cid:146) under the
relevant protocol to the Amsterdam Treaty. Work is in progress on turning the agreement into a legal
instrument on the basis of Article 34(2) of the Treaty on European Union. The purpose of such an
instrument would be to simplify mutual assistance in enforcing decisions taken in respect of road traffic
offences. In addition, an instrument is scheduled to be drawn up that will allow the Member State of
residence to collect fines conclusively imposed in another Member State. It is to be hoped that once these
instruments are in force they will constitute a complete system for enforcing fines abroad and will thus
free the Member States from having to take special measures to ensure that fines are paid by non-residents.

(1) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000.

(2001/C 318 E/139)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0835/01

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Organised environmental crime in European countries

(22 March 2001)

(cid:129) Criminal organisations which harm the environment
in many European countries,

(the (cid:145)eco-mafia(cid:146)) have become excessively
powerful
including Italy. This (cid:145)eco-Mafia(cid:146) makes billions by illegally
disposing of highly toxic waste which then becomes an ecological time-bomb, destroying the health
not only of the current population but of future generations, who will be irredeemably condemned by
polluted water, soil and air.

(cid:129) Examples of such activities were recently shown on Italian public television channels. Moreover,
members of the city council and the decentralised local authority of Milan have recently submitted an
alarming complaint concerning the risk of leakage of dioxins contained in drums illegally buried deep
underground, close to the water-table,
in the area earmarked for the construction of Milan(cid:146)s new
purification plant.

(cid:129) This new plant has been approved by the EU, which has already called for the work to begin.

(cid:129) Given that construction of the purification plant has become urgent and that the (cid:145)eco-Mafia(cid:146) has

enormous capacities to thwart checks of any kind.

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/131

Can the Commission state:

1. whether it plans to take action in support of Milan, so that the decontamination can be carried out as
carefully as possible, enabling an immediate start to be made on the construction of the purification
plant;

2. whether or not it considers it necessary to set up a task-force,

in which all the Member States
participate, to identify and decontaminate illegal dumps of toxic waste and to take legal action, both in
individual countries and at Community level, against the various criminal organisations which harm
the environment, making use of Interpol and public health and environmental organisations?

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

(6 June 2001)

Waste

Under Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (1), Member States are required to ensure
that waste, including toxic waste, is disposed of without posing any threat to either human beings or the
environment. Consequently, the Italian authorities must make sure that waste is managed, removed,
transported and disposed of in a such a way that no unauthorised or illegal points of disposal exist.

The Italian authorities have not asked the Commission to help in cleaning up the location in question. The
Commission does not intend to take any action in this area.

Under Article 8 of Directive 75/442/EEC Member States are required to take the necessary measures to
ensure that the holders of waste deliver the waste either to a private or a public collector or to a third
party carrying out recovery or disposal operations, unless the holder of the waste carries out the recovery
or disposal himself. In cases where the identity of the holder of the waste is not known (such as in the case
of illegal landfilling), it is up to the national authorities to take the necessary measures to comply with the
requirements of Article 8. The uncontrolled dumping of waste over a prolonged period also represents
a violation of Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC, which prescribes that waste is to be recovered or disposed
of without harm to human health or the environment (2).

Treatment of waste water

With regard to the treatment of waste water in the city of Milan and its surrounding area, Council
Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (3) provides for secondary
treatment as a rule and for more advanced treatment in the case of so-called sensitive areas, in particular in
respect of waters which are in danger of eutrophication. The deadlines under the Directive for providing
the discharge and the
adequate treatment are 1998, 2000 and 2005, depending on the size of
characteristics of the affected water.

Given the size of Milan and the character of the Northern Adriatic, waste water treatment facilities for
Milan should have been operational by the end of 1998. The Commission has carried out a thorough
review of the situation and therefore is aware of the fact that a considerable portion of the Milan
area discharges waste water, without appropriate treatment, into the catchment of the River Po, and thus
into the Northern Adriatic. The Commission has,
taken
appropriate legal action in accordance with the EC Treaty.

in its role as guardian of

the EC Treaty,

The sixth Community action programme for the environment:
(cid:145)Environment 2000: Our future, Our
choice(cid:146) for 2001-2010 (4) specifically provides for (cid:145)the taking of vigorous action against environmental
crime (5) (cid:133)(cid:146).

On 13 March 2001, as part of its activities under the first pillar the EC Treaty, the Commission adopted
a proposal for a Directive of Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the environment through
criminal law (6). Once adopted by the Council and Parliament that proposal should enable Community law
protecting the environment to be implemented more efficiently by introducing the minimum body of
criminal offences into the environmental law of all of the Member States.

C 318 E/132

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

The Commission is (a) working on bringing together all of the most reliable information on the existence
and extent of organised environmental crimes and (b) it will encourage the Member States, as part of
police and judicial cooperation (Title VI of the EU Treaty) to back up the proposal for a Directive by
adequate action, and more particularly to lay down the minimum rate of minimum penalties incurred in
all of the Member States and to make it easier to extradite eco criminals from one Member State to
another.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
(2) European Court of Justice, Case C-365/97 (cid:129) S. Rocco.
(3) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.
(4) COM(2001) 31 final.
(5) Cf. p. 15 of the sixth programme.
(6) COM(2001) 139 final.

(2001/C 318 E/140)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0840/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Securities Committee and national legislation

(13 March 2001)

In the context of the recent proposals for a Securities Committee by the Lamfalussy Group of Wise Men,
will the Commission list those Member States in which there is a provision for secondary, implementing or
delegated legislation at the level of national
it describe the system of
parliamentary oversight in each case?

legislatures, and secondly, will

Will it in particular state whether the legislature enjoys the right to reject regulations adopted by the
authorised committee either under a positive or negative resolution procedure (i.e. voting to accept
regulations, or voting against regulations that have been laid down)?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2001)

The Commission has not carried out any study in an official capacity but the information that it currently
legislative
possesses on national
systems provide for delegation of some kind.

legislation in the field of securities indicates that all Member States(cid:146)

This delegation of powers is usually derived from the main framework legislation approved by the national
Parliaments and may be granted to:

(cid:129) the Government (e.g. Belgium, Spain and France);

(cid:129) the Ministry of Finance (e.g. Spain, Luxembourg, Austria and Finland);

(cid:129) the independent national supervisory authorities (e.g. the Comisi(cid:243)n Nacional del Mercado de Valores

in Spain, the Consob in Italy and the Financial Services Authority in the United Kingdom).

In some cases, the framework legislation gives the Government/Ministry of Finance the right to delegate
subsequently to the independent national supervisory authorities (e.g. the Commission des OpØrations de
Bourses in France, the Comisi(cid:243)n Nacional del Mercado de Valores in Spain).

The legal texts approved by governments, ministries or national supervisory authorities according to this
delegation of powers are usually mandatory and come into effect after publication.

The type of parliamentary oversight varies across Member States and also according to whom the power is
delegated.

The power to oversee the exercise of delegated powers varies across the Member States.