WRITTEN QUESTION P-1100/01 by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Council. Chechnya.
Date: 2001-03-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Russia, cooperation policy, crime against humanity, human rights, the EU's international role

C 364 E/46

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

Reply

(27 September 2001)

As the Honourable member is aware the EU co-operation policy is run by the Commission who is at
present undergoing a process of reform in order to prevent some of the deficiencies for which it has been
criticised in the past.

In relation to the Regional Program for the Reconstruction of Central America (RPRCA), the European
the programme
Commission has set up a special administrative entity for the implementation of
accompanied by devolution of its management to a special unit set up at the Commission Delegation in
Managua. The Commission has presented its (cid:145)First Annual report on implementation and monitoring of
the RPRAC regarding year 2000(cid:146) to the Council and, indeed, to the European Parliament.

The Council has been following very closely the situation and has called upon the Commission, through
the appropriate means,
the EU Action Plan on Reconstruction efforts in Central
America (RPRCA) without delay.

to implement

The Council also maintains an open exchange of views on the matter with its partners in Central
America through the San Jose Dialogue. At the XV EU-San Jose Ministerial Conference held in Bonn on
20 May 1999, ministers discussed the contributions of the EU and of Central America to coping with the
aftermath of Hurricane Mitch. The Central American countries acknowledged the rapid and generous
response of the EU that amounted to more than 1 billion Euros, and welcomed the EU Action Plan on
Reconstruction efforts in Central America, amounting to 250 million Euros. Ministers agreed that the
reconstruction programme should tackle the structural problems in Central America beyond mere
reconstruction, by transforming societies.

On this occasion the Central American part appreciated debt service moratorium and debt reduction
decisions in the Paris Club, bilateral debt cancellations and contributions to the multilateral debt service
facility as well as new European initiatives for debt reduction.

On the occasion of the XVI EU-San Jose Ministerial Conference held in Vilamoura on 20 February 2000
both parties stressed the importance of the RPRCA being implemented without delay and noted the
existence of other long-term programmes financed by the Member States. Both parties recalled that the
execution of those reconstruction programmes was to be carried out against the background of the
Stockholm Declaration, with a view to contributing to the transformation of the societies of Central
America, acting in a transparent and decentralised framework and guaranteeing active participation on the
part of civil society, the NGOs and the private sector in the reconstruction process.

On the occasion of the VII San Jose Dialogue held in Guatemala on 26 May 2001 the Ministers welcomed
with interest the progress report on aid granted by the European Commission up to the end of 2000 and,
in particular, on the achievements of RPRCA.

Finally, in the field of disaster prevention and preparedness, reference should also be made to the allocation
by the Commission, since July 1998, of € 5,6 million to the Central American scheme of the Dipecho
programme. The aim of the scheme is to reduce the vulnerability of the people of the region most exposed
to such disasters. The programme focuses on two aspects: building the capacity of both national and
regional
information and
to natural disasters and, promoting exchanges of
coordination between communities, civil protection agencies and local administration.

institutions

to react

(2001/C 364 E/051)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1100/01

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Council

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Chechnya

On 25 February of this year, a mass grave containing 60 bodies was discovered in Khankala, on the
outskirts of Grozny,
less than a kilometre from the headquarters of the Russian forces in Chechnya.
According to human rights organisations and various press reports, 16 of the bodies have been identified

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/47

as those of Chechen civilians who had been missing since their arrest and detention by Russian troops.
These people were in all probability victims of extra-judicial execution. Statements were taken from people
who had reported a relative or close friend as missing and identified the body at the morgue set up by the
Ministry for Emergency Situations in Grozny. Of the 16 bodies thus identified, 12 were of civilians
arrested since last December while four others had been arrested the previous June or August.

Is the Council aware of the serious nature of these developments? If so, what action has it taken (cid:129) or does
it intend to take (cid:129) to ensure that an international commission of inquiry ascertains the truth about this
affair and all the cases of missing persons that have been reported? More generally, does the Council not
consider that its policy in relation to Russia is increasingly coming to resemble a form of complicity in the
criminal policy being pursued in Chechnya by the Russian authorities?

Reply

(27 September 2001)

It was with both sorrow and revulsion that the Council learnt the distressing news of the discovery of sixty
bodies in a Grozny suburb. As in all such cases, the Council followed reports of the find, and the
conflicting accusations that surrounded it.

The EU has spoken out loud and clearly against all attacks on human rights and dignity in Chechnya,
whoever may be their authors. While recognising the difficulties Russia is facing along its Southern
borders, the EU has been particularly vocal
in criticising the Russian government for its role in the
Chechen republic of its country. Time and again, the EU has raised this issue at the very highest level with
the Russian authorities. It was brought up at the meeting between the European Council and President
Putin in Stockholm on 23 March, at the EU-Russia Cooperation Council in Luxembourg on 10 April and
most recently at the Summit with President Putin in Moscow on 17 May.

Ever since the beginning of the conflict, the EU has given its full support to both the OSCE Assistance
Group and the Council of Europe (CoE). The EU recognises that these institutions can play a certain role in
improving the human rights situation in Chechnya, including by helping to investigate all the cases of
missing persons that have been reported. The EU therefore regrets the delays experienced by the OSCE in
returning to the region, and has called on Russia to remove its objections. On a more positive note, the EU
welcomes, however, the setting up of a joint working group between the offices of the Russian Prosecutor
General, the Chechen Prosecutor, and that of Mr Kalamanov, Russian Presidential Special Representative
for human rights in Chechnya, assisted by CoE experts.

The EU has consistently adopted an outspoken and principled stand, at no small cost to its immediate
relations with Russia. This position has been fully in line with the EU(cid:146)s general stance on human rights, as
laid out recently in the resolution that it presented to the 2001 session of the UN Commission on Human
Rights (2001/24). The EU continues to put pressure on Russia with a view to bringing the Russian
authorities to rapidly take the necessary steps to improve the situation in Chechnya.

Nonetheless, it is the firm and considered conviction of the Council that engagement is the best path by
which the EU may work to improve the situation in the Chechen Republic of the Russian Federation.
Without dialogue there would be no way for us to present our views to Russia, and they would be able to
ignore the strength of European feelings concerning this important issue. The Council believes that the fact
that Russia has been taking steps in the right direction (cid:129) albeit belatedly and not going far enough (cid:129)
vindicates this approach. At the recent EU-Russia Summit in Moscow, President Putin acknowledged that
Russia had not done enough to win back the trust of the Chechen population. He agreed that the
humanitarian situation in Chechnya was serious. He invited the EU to put forward guidelines for the
improvement of the work of humanitarian aid organisations active in the region. President Putin also
suggested to restructure the ongoing assistance efforts in order to create conditions and incentives for the
IDPs to return.

C 364 E/48

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

The work of Mr Kalamanov(cid:146)s office, in which staff from the Council of Europe participate, the setting-up
of a civil judiciary, initial charges for human rights violations and the adoption of some reconstruction
measures are all first steps in the right direction, even though they are still inadequate. However, the
Council will continue to insist that the Russian authorities bring to justice all those responsible for human
rights violations.

(2001/C 364 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1109/01

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Council

(9 April 2001)

Subject: The Luxembourg compromise and the Ioannina compromise after the ratification of the Nice

Treaty

What is the status of the Ioannina compromise and the Luxembourg compromise after the ratification of
the Nice Treaty?

Reply

(27 September 2001)

The Council decision of 29 March 1994 on qualified majority decision-making by the Council (1) as
amended by the Decision of 1 January 1995 (2), commonly known as the (cid:145)Ioannina Compromise(cid:146),
is
mentioned in Declaration No 50 annexed to the Final Act to the Amsterdam Treaty relating to the
Protocol on the institutions with the prospect of enlargement of the European Union, which is attached to
that Treaty. According to this Declaration (cid:145)Until the entry into force of the first enlargement it is agreed
that the decision of the Council of 29 March 1994 ((cid:146)the Ioannina Compromise(cid:145)) will be extended and, by
that date, a solution for the special case of Spain will be found(cid:146). It is recalled that the Council decision of
29 March 1994 does not have an expiry date.

The results of the IGC of Nice will have the following consequences.

The Protocol on the institutions, to which this Declaration is related, will be repealed with the entry into
force of the Protocol on the enlargement of the European Union annexed by the Treaty of Nice to the
Treaty on European Union and to the Treaties establishing the European Communities. Furthermore,
Article 3 of the same Protocol on the enlargement provides for new Council vote weightings which will be
applicable in January 2005.

Therefore, the (cid:145)Ioannina Compromise(cid:146) will no longer be applicable from 1 January 2005.

As for what is commonly called the (cid:145)Luxembourg Compromise(cid:146) (Conclusions of the extraordinary session
of the Council in Luxembourg on 17, 18, 27 and 28 January 1966), its status will remain the same after
the entry into force of the Nice Treaty.

(1) OJ C 105, 13.4.1994, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 1, 1.1.1995.

(2001/C 364 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1130/01

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council

(3 April 2001)

Subject: World-wide genocide of Christians

The United Nations and several human rights organisations have recently sounded the alarm over the
increase in persecutions of Christians world-wide:
in 2000, 165 000 were killed and 200 million
persecuted.