WRITTEN QUESTION E-1080/01 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Protracted settlement procedures following (road) accidents in Switzerland.
Date: 2001-04-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Switzerland, conciliation procedure (part of ordinary legislative procedure), motor vehicle insurance, third-party insurance, transport accident

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/41

Every person belonging to the usually resident population is asked either about his/her citizenship or
country of birth. The census therefore contains information on the foreign population.

The statistical information from the censuses will be transmitted to Eurostat in the form of a Community
programme of tables. These tables will include information on the foreign population. A copy of the
document presenting this programme of tables will be sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the
Secretariat General of the Parliament.

Generally speaking, Eurostat does not directly collect statistical
information available directly from
data providers (households, enterprises, etc.). This information is collected and transmitted to Eurostat by
the national
in accordance with
Community definitions and methods in order to ensure comparability.

services, particularly the National Statistical

Institutes,

statistical

With regard to the Eurobarometer mentioned by the Honourable Member in his question, the Commission
wishes to draw his attention to the fact that the Eurobarometer is not a statistical instrument but an
opinion poll. The Eurobarometer surveys are carried out at the Commission(cid:146)s request by reputable survey
institutes in the Member States.

(2001/C 364 E/046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1080/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(9 April 2001)

Subject: Protracted settlement procedures following (road) accidents in Switzerland

On Friday, 16 February the Swedish Presidency discussed with the President of Switzerland the right to
rapid, low-cost compensation for European victims of road accidents in Switzerland. This initiative is part
of the search for a solution to the long drawn out damage claims between EU victims and Swiss insurance
companies, because the fourth directive on motor vehicle insurance is not applicable here.

Loop-holes in Swiss legislation enable insurance companies to withhold for a very long time the payment
of damages resulting from civil liability. This source of legal uncertainty affects EU citizens who are victims
of (road) accidents in Switzerland. They become caught up in a legalistic procedural wrangle with no
prospect of compensation within a reasonable period of time. One of the victims is a citizen of the Belgian
Federation who has been waiting for a number of years for speedy, equitable and fair compensation.

This case has already prompted questions to the Commission, the Council and the Belgian Minister of
Foreign Affairs. In reply to a previous question, the Council said that EU Institutions had acknowledged the
problem of protracted settlement procedures following road accidents in third countries and that they were
prepared to tackle the problem with the proposal for the third directive on motor vehicle insurance.
However, the fourth directive affords no solution to the settlement procedures which are still under way.

1. What results and/or agreements have come from discussions with the Swiss President?

for

Does the Council think that a rapid, fair and reasonable solution will be found, within the foreseeable
2.
future,
following road accidents in
Switzerland? If not, what further action will the Council take in order to find a rapid, fair and reasonable
solution within the foreseeable future?

the victims involved in protracted settlement procedures

C 364 E/42

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

Reply

(27 September 2001)

The fourth motor insurance Directive (1) which has been referred to in the Written Question and in the
Council(cid:146)s answers to previous questions relating to the settlement procedures following road accidents,
adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in 2000, aims at shortening and simplifying the
settlement procedures that follow after road accidents having a transnational dimension to the extent
provided for in the Directive.

The fourth motor insurance Directive applies, to some extent, to settlement procedures that follow after
accidents in Switzerland. This is because the Directive also applies to injured parties resident
in
a Community Member State who are entitled to compensation in respect of loss or injury resulting from
insurers(cid:146) bureaux, as defined in Article 1(3) of
accidents occurring in third countries whose national
Directive 72/166/EEC, have joined the Green Card system whenever such accidents are caused by the use
of vehicles insured and normally based in a Member State.

However, accidents in Switzerland which occur for instance between a vehicle insured in Switzerland and
a vehicle insured in a Community Member State do not fall within the scope of the Directive. An
improvement of settlement procedures in such cases would have to be negotiated between the Community
and Switzerland.

Since this matter belongs to the Community competence, the initiative for such negotiations has to come
from the Commission as a recommendation provided for in Article 300 of
the Treaty. No such
recommendation has been made to the Council.

The contents of the discussions, which according to the Honourable Member have taken place between the
Presidency and the President of Switzerland on 16 February, have not been brought to the attention of the
Council.

(1) Directive 2000/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 May 2000 on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles and
amending Council Directives 73/239/EEC and 88/357/EEC (Fourth motor insurance Directive).

(2001/C 364 E/047)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1082/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 April 2001)

Subject: Blurring of interests and distortion of competition with the Sensus project

The Sensus project, the successor to Aventinus, seeks to develop an information exchange programme for
the European police and intelligence services. The search for interesting language technology is an
important part of this project. Sensus is subsidised by the Commission. The reply to Question P-0009/
01 (1) shows that Sensus and Aventinus I and II have been financed from budget line B6-6121.113 of the
telematics applications programme (1994-1998). A maximum contribution of € 2 500 000 was approved
for Aventinus I, and of this € 2 341 190 was applied for and paid. A maximum contribution of € 550 000
was approved for Aventinus II, of which his € 513 777 was applied for and paid. A maximum
contribution of € 2 250 000 was approved for Sensus, of which € 478 753 was paid on 31 December
2000.

Coordination of Sensus is in the hands of Stephan Bodenkamp/Christoph Kionowski, a secret agent of the
Bundesnachrichtendienst. He is also behind three language Development Companies of Lernout & Haspie
(L & H). Thanks to his dual role,
the Bundesnachrichtendienst can have access to L & H(cid:146)s language
technology. It is immediately apparent that the Sensus-Bundesnachrichtendienst-L & H set-up results in (a)
a dubious blurring of interests between the private and the (cid:145)public sector(cid:146), (b) an imbalance in the language
technology know-how of the various police and security services and (c) unfair competition between those
language technology firms which are involved in Sensus and those which are not.